An Evening Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 06:58:40 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

The comments to our threads are filling up pretty quickly, even with the "stay on topic" rules. That's a good thing.

If the comments stay as full, I may be taking requests for volunteer comment moderators.

Since I'll be out for a few hours, here's a place for you to decide the topics and keep the conversation going.

NOTE - BTD Comments closed. There is a new Open thread. Go Gators!

< Why Obama is Lukewarm on a New Florida Election | Howard Dean On FL And MI >

The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

Menu

Home | About | RSS
E-Mail | Comment Policy |
Search
Login

Make a new account

Existing Users

Username:
Password:
Creator and Principal Author
- Jeralyn E. Merritt
TL Alumni

Contribute To TalkLeft

Sections
Site Credits
- TalkLeft Graphics by C.L., Our Man in Hollywood (2006 - 2008)
- TalkLeft Header Graphic by Monk
- Powered by Scoop
Legal
- All Content Copyright ©2002-2024. Reprints only by permission from TalkLeft.com
- Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.
- TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.
"The pump don't work 'cause the vandals took the handles"
© 1965 Bob Dylan

An Evening Open Thread | 234 comments (234 topical)

I'm going to go ahead and ask the question: (5.00 / 4) (#1)
by Jim J on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:00:58 PM EST

Has Kos finally lost his marbles or is he purposely trying to destroy the party? I can find no other explanation, other than perhaps he's just getting boatloads of cash from the Obama campaign.

Seriously, today he very deliberately took his blog to a whole new level of bizarre, deviant discourse. Unless he actually has lost his mind, it cannot be by accident.

Any ideas?

Yes stay away from his blog add TPM and Huff Post (5.00 / 2) (#2)
by Salt on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:07:29 PM EST

the have gone way fringe.

Parent

we become what we hate (5.00 / 4) (#8)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:10:30 PM EST

It is mob mentality, plain and simple. You see this in everything from frat house hazing to (in the most extreme) gang raping. All it takes is for one person to say, "no, this is wrong," and either another person stands up and agrees, in which case the behavior stops, or the mob shouts down the objector so that the attack can continue. On the net, where it is anonymous, where there is absolutely no recourse or threat of punishment (in the immediate) the objector is more likely to be attacked as well. The beast feeds itself; what is going to stop it?

This doesn't happen just with men; women do it, too. Remember the cheerleader hazing at that high school where a girl had her arm broken and others were made to eat dirt and feces? Men tend to do it more, but women tend to be more vicious. MoDo comes to mind-she is savage in the way that only a woman can be savage to another woman.

The eventual punishment will be loss of income, loss of readers, and, inevitably, loss of status. Only the last will matter, by the way.

Parent

I hate Dubya (5.00 / 3) (#12)
by Militarytracy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:13:09 PM EST

Now I know why I'm getting those whiskers on my chin........sheesh!

Parent

: Or, as my younger daugher noted, (5.00 / 1) (#44)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:30:10 PM EST

nobody ever told me I'd get hairs on my chin!

Parent

We do? I thought we "become what we eat" (5.00 / 1) (#92)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:48:49 PM EST

Parent

But the punishment could be worse (none / 0) (#198)
by Cream City on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:36:37 PM EST

as it could be tampering with the process of Dems picking our nominee and winning the White House. And of course, as the blog insanity accelerates, let us not be surprised if it finally goes too far -- with a reaction that could restrict all of the blogosphere. We have seen this before. And so it concerns us all, and it may not be enough to leave sites. There is need for something more, somehow.

Parent

I suspect (5.00 / 4) (#9)
by Coldblue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:11:11 PM EST

he's simply pandering to his current traffic.

The good thing is that many long time 'kossacks' have found better sites to read, i.e. TalkLeft.

Parent

I mourn the place (5.00 / 7) (#13)
by andgarden on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:13:59 PM EST

I don't think I'll be spending much time there anymore.

Parent

Yeah, me too (5.00 / 4) (#17)
by Coldblue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:16:41 PM EST

I thought I was hooked. Now if only I could apply that discipline toward quitting smoking :-)

Parent

: i gave it up three months ago. (5.00 / 1) (#131)
by hellothere on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:00:42 PM EST

i hadn't really smoked all my life but started a year ago after a death in the family. now i've stopped. hooray!

Parent

I've always liked the (none / 0) (#65)
by dutchfox on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:39:37 PM EST

higher level of respect among posters and commenters on TL. That's why I stick with it and rarely read the other blogs.

Parent

Kos (5.00 / 2) (#11)
by eric on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:13:00 PM EST

Hey Jim, noticed this post isn't about race. Maybe that will make someone happy ;)

Seriously, I agree. It is so crazy how angry and nasty things have become. It's irrational. I can't believe he is paid off, though. Just insanity.

Parent

: Beyond the baseless accusations... (5.00 / 1) (#100)
by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:50:59 PM EST

..I found this so insulting because he is accusing a Democratic candidate of playing the race card who's base happens to be Latinos, women, and working class people. So that must mean that he thinks those people (which includes me) are receptive to that otherwise why what is he suggesting is Hillary's motivation in a Democratic primary season? Meanwhile the intolerant blowhards that he has recently attracted to his site pat themselves on the back for their supposed tolerance.
And yes I know that he is Latino, that doesn't excuse it in my book.

Parent

I was going to ask the same question (5.00 / 1) (#18)
by Manuel on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:18:01 PM EST

It seems that his outrage is genuine. Does he have any basis for his belief that Clinton has been playing the race card besides what little is known about this video? Inside info perhaps? Information from the Obama campaign? How did we get to the point where any anti Clinton spin gets instant credibility on some blogs no matter how outlandish?

Watching the left blogs this primary season has brought to mind VFD from "A Series of Unfortunate Events" on more than one ocassion. I hope Markos isn't turning into Count Olaf.

Parent

Daily Kos is becoming infuriating. . . (5.00 / 2) (#29)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:21:16 PM EST

(which presumably is good for business) but Kos has said plenty of wildly out of line and often ill-informed things in the past. There's no reason to assume he's doing it for venal reasons.

Daily Kos was originally sub-titled "Daily Rants On The States Of The Nation". That kind of posting has been produced a very active blog. If Kos has any venal reasons for going off half-cocked it's to keep traffic up at his site.

Parent

But isn't today the worst? (5.00 / 2) (#88)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:47:58 PM EST

Parent

I have been similarly shocked. . . (5.00 / 1) (#126)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:59:45 PM EST

before. I'm thinking of his comments about the Blackwater Guards, his attack on "some guy named Garrison Keillor", and other attacks on Clinton.

But the one that got me the most angry was an attack he posted on "New York liberals" ruining the Democratic Party in which he named a number of individuals -- not all of them from New York, but all of them Jewish.

In fact, in his defense, I'll say that if there's anything to the video story then it would be a pretty serious offense by someone. Does Markos really believe there's something to it? I can't say -- but if he did, I could understand him writing about it.

Parent

And some of us remember well (5.00 / 1) (#203)
by Cream City on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:38:05 PM EST

his attacks on "the women's studies set," on NARAL and more -- the man, sorry to say, has issues with women. I see that behind these attacks on Clinton.

Parent

: Yes. .. (none / 0) (#217)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:54:24 PM EST

I wrote that comment hastily and I have a feeling there are a number of other boners he's written.

Parent

I just posted (below) that I left dkos (5.00 / 2) (#54)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:34:08 PM EST

over that post. It was the last straw.

Parent

yeah I read it (5.00 / 1) (#61)
by Jim J on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:38:25 PM EST

sad stuff all around, man. Really a shame.

Parent

Thanks. (5.00 / 2) (#85)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:47:35 PM EST

It was a decision long time coming.....and for the record I voted for Obama, so I am not leaving for partisan reasons.

Parent

: well, that's the really sad part (5.00 / 2) (#94)
by Jim J on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:49:16 PM EST

I used to like Obama pretty well, not as much as Hillary, but I was OK with him.
I confess that now I cannot stand the sight of the man. For that I blame his followers. It's not rational or reasonable, but it's hard to rise above.

Parent

Honestly. . . (5.00 / 2) (#77)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:43:58 PM EST

I was impressed with the response you got. I thought it would be much worse.

Parent

: I know. Perhaps there is hope afterall. (5.00 / 2) (#83)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:46:29 PM EST

Lots of good people post there. It's just that their voices are drowned out.

Parent

So, did it make the rec list? (none / 0) (#162)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:15:56 PM EST

[I'm not sure what that signifies re a GBCW diary; anyhow, I'm just teasing.]

Parent

LOL (none / 0) (#174)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:21:21 PM EST

no. But I got 150 comments.

Parent

: That's pretty good, considering (none / 0) (#223)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:02:35 PM EST

most people's attention was fixated on Kos's posts about the allegedly darkened photo.

Parent

I submitted my GBOR diary today (5.00 / 1) (#70)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:41:13 PM EST

Goodbye Orange Republic.

Kos's post on the darkened photo sent me over the edge.

Parent

You're BoringDem? Hi! (5.00 / 2) (#78)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:44:52 PM EST

Glad to know I can find you here. Thanks for having my back over there in the last month.

I wonder if kos backed Obama early and is testing out his influence. Who knows.

Parent

The Obama campaign is not looking for (none / 0) (#81)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:45:50 PM EST

dirty bloggers to aid its campaign, as far as I know.

Parent

Actually, on Obama's site (none / 0) (#159)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:15:21 PM EST

I saw the thing about Hillary's 60 Minutes interview saying she didn't deny the Muslim rumors vehemently enough. Dang should have saved the link.

Parent

That was almost as abad as the (5.00 / 1) (#171)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:19:54 PM EST

"fairy tale" nonsense.
I tell you, if Obama starts opining as to whether Hillary is a good Christian, I will be HIGHLY offended. Hillary simply should not comment on Obama's religion.

Parent

: But if she'd said "no comment" (none / 0) (#214)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:52:27 PM EST

How would she do this - say no comment? That's exactly what pissed people off.

Parent

I see you got the typical response. nt (none / 0) (#106)
by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:52:39 PM EST

Parent

i read the responses. (none / 0) (#146)
by hellothere on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:06:29 PM EST

i've been gone several months, but geez the quality of posts has gone down soooooooooooooo far it is just pathetic. i'll never, never, never return to a site like that.

kos, what have you done? i for one won't give him the benefit of a doubt about his rant re: obama's picture. i won't.

Parent

Well, what burns me about that (5.00 / 1) (#153)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:10:39 PM EST

kind of post is that it's really a diversionary tactic. Hillary's ad makes a very, very good point.
If the only response is "racism", then Hillary must be the candidate. In fact, I think she will be.
The 20% edge among late breakers in TX, and the 2/3 of Democrats who want Hillary to stay in the race tell me that the nomination is Hillary's to lose now---she just needs to raise a couple more doubts about Obama and he's finished.

Parent

Yes, that is the politcal ploy... (none / 0) (#177)
by Oje on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:22:25 PM EST

They want to badger the Clinton camp into pulling that ad and never running it again. If the Clinton campaign tries to cut a new ad with the same comment, the Obama loons will take it as a sign that they were right and begin the loon dance again.

The outcome either way, for them, is that a clip - showing Obama openly admitting that his campaign took precedence to the lives of soldiers in Afghanistan - will be buried for the remainder of the nomination.

Parent

oops, loons is name calling (none / 0) (#180)
by Oje on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:25:01 PM EST

the Obama supporters...

Actually, what are we supposed to call these indivdiuals? If we call them "Obama supporters,' then we are brushing all of Obama's supporters with the same stroke? We can't name the site without violating the post rules...

This whole underground, Cliton-netroots commenting thing has become difficult...

Parent

Oh, the Clinton camp is not dumb (none / 0) (#183)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:26:13 PM EST

about this---I think they will press the issue even harder.
This reminds me of the issue which I personally think defined the 2004 race: Kerry's use of the McCain-Bush debate footage from 2000---when McCain was almost in tears and Bush was smirking.
It was a fantastic ad. Kerry pulled it, at McCain's request.
That was a bad move---it showed a lot of weakness to me.
Also, I think that ad would have ruined McCain's chances in this election, as nobody will vote for someone who cries when insulted.

Parent

: I agree... (none / 0) (#205)
by Oje on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:38:57 PM EST

I do not think the Clinton campaign responds to what they are doing, I just wanted to agree about the video wizards' motives...

Parent

I wish you're reprint it (none / 0) (#235)
by zyx on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 10:29:31 PM EST

on MyDD or something, because I have tried to get that for hours, and it won't come up.

Parent

Remember the comment rules (none / 0) (#3)
by Jeralyn on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:08:03 PM EST

no personal attacks and name calling, and that applies to other blogs and bloggers.

Also Kos is a friend of mine. I don't want people using my site to bash my friends.

Do you have another topic?

Parent

Jeralyn, with respect. . . (5.00 / 4) (#74)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:42:51 PM EST

Also Kos is a friend of mine. I don't want people using my site to bash my friends.

In left politics Kos is a player on par with the television pundits people slag off in the Horse's A*s posts you guys occasionally put up. Some people -- in fact, the kind of people who are attracted to this blog because it enforces standards of conduct -- are going to conclude that Daily Kos and Markos himself are as deserving of approbation as other pundits. This conflict is only going to get worse as your site continues collecting the outflow of participants from Daily Kos. Just half an hour ago I proposed Talk Left as an alternative site to a long time Daily Kos poster for whom Markos's allegations against Clinton today were the last straw.

You can't fairly expect people to know which A-list blogger-pundits are your friends (and thus off-limits) and which are not (and can be included in the voting for biggest Horse's A*s). I had no idea that you knew Markos. I assume you don't know Josh Marshall, since he's routinely mentioned using language similar to that Jim used in discussing Markos.

Parent

My observation is that Jeralyn (none / 0) (#110)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:53:41 PM EST

prefers no one diss other bloggers here. However, some posters are more easily corraled than others.

Parent

Josh Marshall. . . (none / 0) (#117)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:55:35 PM EST

is routinely given a rough time here. My impression is that if one were to substitute Markos's name for Josh's in some of those posts one would be asking for trouble.

Parent

Here is the thing (none / 0) (#134)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:01:23 PM EST

many a smaller blog have devolved into b**ch sessions about big orange, and no one wants that to happen here. I have seen it happen at least 2x, and I do not get around that much. So...best to move on.

Parent

Fair enough. (none / 0) (#154)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:11:09 PM EST

I certainly don't want to see that happen here either (although I think you may be referring to blogs that were more or less founded to complain about Daily Kos.

I also don't want to see treating Markos the way other pundits are treated here turn into a bannable or deleteable offense.

Parent

: That won't happen (none / 0) (#172)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:19:56 PM EST

Just yesterday, Armando posted a diary refuting Markos' assertion that Obama would wage a 50 state campaign.
It's the way that we approach the subject is the key.

Parent

Here is the thing (none / 0) (#168)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:18:11 PM EST

Then, please, can his friends (5.00 / 1) (#215)
by Cream City on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:53:01 PM EST

who are friends of the Dem party please tell him to do something? What is happening at his site is, frankly, not only bad for the party but getting scary -- feeding who knows what sort of insanity. As I said above, in addition to hurting the party, this could cause reactions against the blogosphere. We have seen that before in politics. And as long as we have a Bush administration, it could be another blow to the rights of those who practice freedom with responsibility. That site does not.

Parent

OK, guess it's not actually an open thread (none / 0) (#7)
by Jim J on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:09:43 PM EST

OK, fine.

Parent

sorry jeralyn, i'll stay away from (none / 0) (#149)
by hellothere on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:07:25 PM EST

references to that blog. i have other things to comment on that are needed. thanks

Parent

Kos Has Jumped the Shark (5.00 / 2) (#4)
by xjt on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:08:42 PM EST

I assume you're referring to the "blackened" photo paranoia. He's off the rails and Aravosis's site is also too far gone to ever be taken seriously again.

In Mild Defense of Kos (5.00 / 1) (#23)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:18:33 PM EST

If Republicans had run such an ad, we might see kos' point.

I's be SHOCKED if campaign Clinton intentionally darkened Obama's skin for the ad to make him look blacker. It had to have been a byproduct of producing the ad.

Found this at TalkLeft:

Yeah, and it's a bogus claim. Anyone knowing anything about graphics or working with video, knows gamma correction (or from what I saw sharpening) will darken the image(s) as a by-product.
This is a pain when trying to enhance the chroma, so hues won't wash out, with video compression or stills (e.g., JPEG conversion). Not only the blacks get darker, all the colors darken (as you can see in examples -- look at the background and tie). Terrible with darker hair. :/

Parent

Not TalkLeft, No Quarter (none / 0) (#25)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:19:06 PM EST

found that comment at No Quarter.

Parent

: further to NoQuarter (5.00 / 3) (#40)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:28:37 PM EST

different monitors show different tonal variations, so my iMac might show an image darker while another person's PC might show it lighter. Unless you've got a tightly calibrated monitor, you can end up washing out or darkening in a way that looks extremely exaggerated on a different viewer's monitor.
And, as someone who spent a few years in print and advertising, aa's, Asians and other people of color are REALLY hard to calibrate, especially depending on the background they are standing against. You have to tweak it very carefully or you end up making things look totally out of whack-muddy, yellow, whatever. It is a nightmare, especially if you have a poor image to begin with, and the problem only compounds when you lower the resolution or compress for the internet. Other factors: the quality of the original film (from the internet? Crappy), lighting, ambient lighting, etc.

Parent

fwiw (none / 0) (#233)
by ding7777 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:16:39 PM EST

I thought the 3 a.m. video made Obama look "drab" but this photo appears to have beenn touched up to make Obama look more stereotypical "African-American black"

Parent

Any more so... (none / 0) (#20)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:18:18 PM EST

...than the charges of misogyny?

Me thinks fair and balanced is the new catchword for all the candidate partisans. Advocates of both sides are behaving as if their personal channels for venting are web versions of Fox and Friends.

Parent

Well, to quote Josh Marshall (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by xjt on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:12:48 PM EST

"sigh."

I don't know what is acceptable to say here, or what gets your head bitten off, so I'll just stop commenting. Kos is behaving outrageously, but if he is a friend of the moderators, I guess we are not to speak of it.

No, it's the personal attack on Kos (5.00 / 8) (#41)
by hitchhiker on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:28:57 PM EST

that's a problem. When we say "that's a crackpot argument being made over there" and go on to explain why, that's just discourse.

When we say "Kos is a crackpot and I hate him" and leave it at that, that's just an attack.

There are a lot of people here who spent the last 5 years checking DK every day. We counted on it to keep us "reality-based." We knew that if some crazy theory slipped into the diaries or even the front page, the community would investigate and if it was bogus, it would die a quick death.

Now there is a lot of stuff flourishing over there that is simply not --sorry-- based in reality. And I honestly don't know today if I ever should have placed the confidence I did in what I read there. That confidence evaporated sometime in January, when it became commonplace to read what I knew were lies and see them cheered and recommended all day long.

Parent

: That's a very good explanation (none / 0) (#72)
by Edgar08 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:42:40 PM EST

And I will use it when "Kossacks" accuse TL of censorship.

Parent

Obama calling for Press attacks on Clinton? (5.00 / 2) (#14)
by Salt on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:15:54 PM EST

Oh, Oh CNN calling Obama on his attempt to use the Press as his campaigns negative surrogate attacking Clinton staying above the fray, seems they finally get it and are saying nope not so fast and that he appears whiny, ouch. Lou Dobbs claimed Dean was demanding the SD step in for Obama and knock Senator Clinton out is this true is their some article or speech he has given on this?

He said last night we'd be fine as long as (5.00 / 1) (#22)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:18:26 PM EST

we have a winner by June. I don't think there's much possibility of that now though.

Parent

Was this on the Lou Dobbs show (none / 0) (#119)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:56:05 PM EST

the part about Obama asking the press to attack Hillary.

Parent

: No the new female ahh (none / 0) (#136)
by Salt on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:01:43 PM EST

something Brown I think tonight around 7 and she was interviewing another female CNN commentator in the back and forth this was right before the Senators from NJ and Mo.

Parent

Please don't institute the ability (5.00 / 2) (#15)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:16:29 PM EST

of commenters to disappear the comments of others. Not a good thing.

Yes, do it and give me the power (none / 0) (#21)
by Militarytracy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:18:25 PM EST

Muwahahahahahaha

Parent

Eternal Hope. (none / 0) (#28)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:21:11 PM EST

Parent

where? (none / 0) (#60)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:37:53 PM EST

Parent

: Ha, ha. Made you look. (5.00 / 1) (#226)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:03:28 PM EST

Parent

oculus (none / 0) (#30)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:21:29 PM EST

like you didn't tattle on me for calling somebody an arrogant f-ball!

Parent

: Ha. (none / 0) (#48)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:32:19 PM EST

Parent

I would add (none / 0) (#38)
by Coldblue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:27:53 PM EST

...no mojo.

Parent

We have mojo here...it just doesn't get you (5.00 / 4) (#43)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:29:31 PM EST

anything. Peaceful isn't it?

Parent

: Very n/t (5.00 / 2) (#52)
by Coldblue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:33:43 PM EST

Parent
: Maybe we should call it. . . (5.00 / 3) (#135)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:01:28 PM EST

nojo?

Parent

I don't like Claire McCaskill (sp?). (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:16:40 PM EST

Independents, Independents!

McCaskill (5.00 / 2) (#31)
by eric on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:22:46 PM EST

I don't like her, either. Actually, I've never met her but I don't like the way she has turned out as a Senator. I remember being really excited about that pick-up in Missouri and while I am glad she's a Dem, she hasn't exactly been what I expected.

Parent

: Details? (none / 0) (#66)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:39:55 PM EST

I noticed on the NewsHour tonight - Obama supporters were McCaskill and Bill Bradley, Clinton supporters were Ferrarro and Panetta.
It's this outsider-insider thing that's really playing out.

Parent

Forget Democrats! (none / 0) (#33)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:23:21 PM EST

I hate this relying on Independents for a November win - you really think McCain can't get Independents?

Hillary gets the base. I know somebody said this - you can't win an election without the base.

Also - Hillary has more intensity. Heard this years ago - "Americans will vote for strong and wrong over soft and right". Well she's not wrong, we know that, but she does have an intensity the other candidate does not. Either really like her or really don't.

Parent

Hey, I agree with you! (5.00 / 1) (#37)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:26:14 PM EST

She was saying that Independents will decide this race and that is why Obama is a better candidate. Last night, HC got as many Independent votes as he did in Ohio.

Parent

Thanks - will write that down (5.00 / 1) (#128)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:00:08 PM EST

I've always found Hillary to be more electable, but I need to back up my arguments. Thanks.

Parent

But I must say - where is Hillary's war room? (none / 0) (#133)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:01:06 PM EST

Today they should have been playing up the "Obama outspent us 2:1" and "Hillary won Independents" and "Hillary won Texas! Is that a red state or what?" And whatever else they can think of.

Parent

: On the other hand - Seat Florida Delegates (5.00 / 1) (#164)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:16:34 PM EST

is dominating the news cycle today.

Parent

Rezko watch! (5.00 / 2) (#24)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:18:56 PM EST

Rezko In Debt $50 Million; How Did He Afford Obama Lot?

LINK

Man, ABC is really grabbing onto this.

I think Jeralyn & BTD are wrong about this. (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:21:09 PM EST

I don't care about it but I think a lot of voters will if it continues to get more attention.

Parent

Nothing to see here; please keep moving. (5.00 / 1) (#34)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:23:57 PM EST

Parent

What makes you say this (I agree) (5.00 / 1) (#36)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:25:25 PM EST

Curious what makes you say this? I think it will matter because many still say they "don't really know who Obama is." He's still largely undefined, which makes me think this will stick somewhat.

Parent

Because it is getting enough media play (5.00 / 1) (#39)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:28:28 PM EST

to make people take notice. I've had two relatives ask me what's the deal with Obama and his house and that man in Chicago.

Parent

perception (5.00 / 2) (#46)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:31:11 PM EST

is all that matters.

If people needed proof before making accusations, many lawyers would be on breadlines.

Parent

: many professionals including attorneys (none / 0) (#160)
by hellothere on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:15:28 PM EST

are trained in ethics to understand that perception is extremely important. the appearance of impropriety can lead to further questions. so yes, there is something to discuss although some hope we will just "keep moving". if the media is grabbing onto it, then i'd say obama has a problem.

Parent

Man... (none / 0) (#45)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:31:06 PM EST

...Senator Clinton's supporters really need to watch it. Pretty soon you are going to be bombarded with media questions about Hsu, Vince Foster, Whitewater, President Clinton's income sources, the failure to disclose White House documents, etc. There's no there there, much like with Rezko. But if you push the Obama campaign into a corner all of that is going to flood out into the open. As with the bogus experience charge.

Parent

Bring it on! It's all been said and done. (5.00 / 1) (#49)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:32:37 PM EST

And her experience certainly isn't bogus.

Parent

Heh, some Hillary supporters (5.00 / 1) (#55)
by Militarytracy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:34:10 PM EST

aren't as lazy as I am and they just come out swinging ;)

Parent

Really? (none / 0) (#58)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:36:09 PM EST

It was all said and done when President Clinton was in office and he never won with a majority of the vote, and only won with a third party challenger to Republican candidates.

It was never said and done when Senator Clinton was running a national campaign against a media darling perceived to be an independent and closet liberal, with political and military experience that puts Senator Clinton to shame.

Parent

How old are you? (5.00 / 3) (#68)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:40:57 PM EST

Seriously, you need to start asking for the talking points for younger folks. You are sorely miseducated here if you think all of those issues were not beaten to death, then dragged into the dirt and stomped on, then beaten again and again and again until Newt Gingrich ran back to his mistress in Georgia with tears in his eyes.

Parent

Are you using McCain's record to score points for (5.00 / 1) (#80)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:44:53 PM EST

Obama? You said Obama would bring up these things, not McCain. She can take it from either but I do think either one of our candidates will have some trouble running against McCain by the time Nov. comes.

Parent

It wil be used by both... (none / 0) (#96)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:49:47 PM EST

...because as with Rezko, there is no there, there, but the Clinton campaign insists there is.

And really, running on transparency is not the strongpoint of the Clintons, for various reasons. The attacks on Michelle Obama's comments are hilarious when they come from Senator Clinton's supporters. Say what you want about the propriety of the question, he was disbarred for a reason.

My point is that her momentum picked up when she used rather misleading talking points on Rezko and the NAFTA nonaffair. If politics is politics, and the voters buy it, well...I won't blame them for using it.

Parent

Ok now give us the what________meant (none / 0) (#113)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:54:17 PM EST

Line again

Parent

Oh BTW when the attacks against Bill (none / 0) (#115)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:55:31 PM EST

Clinton were at its worse his popularity rating was 65%

Parent

Hey hey (none / 0) (#196)
by Oje on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:35:04 PM EST

NY Times poll, page 15, February 20-24:

Bill Clinton favorable rating among Democratic Primary Voters: 70%. What does Obama hope to accomplish?

Parent

: don't tell him that he'll say we (none / 0) (#208)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:42:19 PM EST

have to wait till Obama tells him what to say/

Parent

the democratic base doesn't much (5.00 / 1) (#175)
by hellothere on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:22:07 PM EST

cotton to obama supporters trying to trash the clinton presidency. try another line. that won't fly!

Parent

Alec (5.00 / 1) (#56)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:34:26 PM EST

as a Clinton supporter, I say: give us all you got. The media asked those questions years ago. They got answers. The government spent millions of our tax dollars finding out that Whitewater was absolutely nothing.

If you can find a media outlet that wants to run with any of those stories, then have at it. Clinton can take it. I have no fear.

Can you say the same for Obama?

Parent

But it isn't (none / 0) (#64)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:39:05 PM EST

...just Whitewater, and it isn't just about Senator Clinton. It is about the co-presidency, which they have virtually promised us.

If they smear Senator Obama with these tactics, Whitewater and more comes to the forefront. (and she has certainly mentioned Rezko, NAFTA, etc.) (btw, the idea that NAFTA was political posturing in light of both the Iraq war vote, her past and continued support of NAFTA, is simply not credible coming from her).

Point is, she was never vetted, and President Clinton never won over a majority of voters. So where is this vetting?

Parent

: alec, the one that hasn't been vetted (none / 0) (#173)
by hellothere on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:20:25 PM EST

is obama. so let's get started, shall we?

Parent
: You know, when Bill Clinton left office (none / 0) (#229)
by echinopsia on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:09:56 PM EST

There were a lot of people saying we should revoke the 22nd amendment and give him a third term. He was that popular.
I know Obamites - the younger ones anyway - think that all the "scandals" of his administration would be handy to use against Hillary.
I say please don't throw us in that briar patch, Br'er Fox.
Unless you want to remind every Democrat over the age of 40 how much we loved the Clintons and how furious we were at the way they were treated.

Parent

Obama will be crucified if he does (none / 0) (#79)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:44:52 PM EST

that. DEMOCRATS do not cotton to repetition of Republican lies.

Parent

Alec82 the problem is (none / 0) (#86)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:47:53 PM EST

that all that crap has already been brought out by the Republicans, the media, so called progressive bloggers,etc. So there is nothing new there and anyone who is going to believe anything illegal was done already believes it and won't change their mind. Actually I think the Clinton would welcome these kinds of attacks every time they have been brought before their popularity goes up through the roof. So they can deliver all they want but remember Hsu and people like him have given to Obama's allies and the Obama campaign actually tried to solicit from him.

Parent

Much like Rezko... (none / 0) (#99)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:50:40 PM EST

...raised money for President Clinton?

Parent

Link? (none / 0) (#130)
by LatinoVoter on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:00:23 PM EST

Parent

I know that the Clintons (none / 0) (#140)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:03:53 PM EST

were photographed with Rezko (perhaps when they were raising money for Obama?); however, I believe that there is no proof that Rezko ever contributed money to them.

Hsu gave money to both Clinton and Obama. Interestingly, though--since you seem to be raising questions--when Hsu tried to kill himself, in his suicide note, he complained about the presidential candidate running on "hope and change" who smeared him and drove him to suicide. Now, I don't think he meant Gravel, but I'm open to persuasion.

Parent

: Rezko never contributed a dime to (5.00 / 1) (#155)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:12:30 PM EST

any Clinton.

Parent
: I believe. . . (5.00 / 1) (#170)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:19:28 PM EST

that the photo of Rezko with the Clintons was taken at a fundraiser for Carol Mosley Braun.

Parent

prove it! (none / 0) (#178)
by hellothere on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:22:45 PM EST

Parent

watch it (none / 0) (#107)
by eric on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:52:47 PM EST

or you will rehash the Newt Gingrich/Ken Starr agenda? Is that what you want?

Parent

Link? I've never seen that connection. (none / 0) (#125)
by LatinoVoter on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:59:40 PM EST

Parent

: oops wrong post. (none / 0) (#129)
by LatinoVoter on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:00:09 PM EST

Parent

LOL, we'll be bombarded? (none / 0) (#124)
by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:59:21 PM EST

I don't identify that closely with any candidates so I hope nobody comes to my door asking those questions. As for Hillary, how would that be different from now?

Parent

is that a threat? and let me tell you (none / 0) (#169)
by hellothere on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:18:56 PM EST

that whitewater, foster, monica has been talked about, discussed and investigated to the point people are SICK OF IT. so bring all that up, put it all out there. personally i don't like threats. it hardens my thoughts and feelings and makes me put my boxing gloves on.

you will find the typical american voter feels the same. frankly, i hope the obama campaign goes for it. that'll settle the primary much sooner with obama the loser. go right ahead.

Parent

Doesn't it seem (5.00 / 2) (#35)
by DaytonDem on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:24:31 PM EST

a bit odd that the Obama people have still not released the Feb donations? I heard this trumping number of 50 million batted about but now nothing. If they had buried the competition would it not have been good politics to release it before Ohio and Texas to show strength. Sounds like the 50 super delegates thing. imo

spending (none / 0) (#42)
by eric on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:29:30 PM EST

He might have raised a lot of money, but he surely was spending even more. In Ohio and Texas, the Obama campaign was practically its own economic stimulus package.

Yet, there is still a recession and Obama didn't win...

Parent

Not trying to get all tinfoil and weird, but (none / 0) (#47)
by Jim J on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:31:25 PM EST

I've had a lot of questions about Obama and his money. I still refuse to believe these huge record hauls are all from hipsters clicking on laptops in the corner Starbucks.

Yeah, yeah, I know, public record and all. I still can't shake the doubts. It just doesn't add up.

Parent

Kids (none / 0) (#59)
by eric on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:37:21 PM EST

these days seem to have lots of money. It's mommy and daddy money, but they have it. It isn't like the days when I was in my early 20's.

Parent

Oh please... (none / 0) (#75)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:42:51 PM EST

...I gave him very small donations, and I work, thank you very much. This nonsense just exposes how weak Senator Clinton will be with the youth vote in the GE.

We're all either trust fund babies or latte loving liberals...but not "real" Americans or Democrats.

Parent

Alec (5.00 / 1) (#118)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:55:36 PM EST

can you guess why so many of us knew that you were a young college student? I'm not trying to be nasty here, but most of us here have been democrats for a very long time, and at one point in our craggly old lives, we were the "youth vote" too.

It's simple statistics: there are more of us than there are of you. And I say this as a woman of a certain age ("Face it, girls, I'm older and I have more insurance!") With all due respect to the "youth vote," Clinton has been doing pretty darn well without it.

And I take offense to your slur about "real" Americans. No one questioned your patriotism in any way. As for your democratic credentials, do you plan to vote for Clinton should Obama lose?

Parent

Young... (none / 0) (#158)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:14:51 PM EST

...third year law student, and at the top of my class. Quite a difference between me and some random radical in their second year of undergrad willing to cry at an Obama rally. Fact is, I'm just stating the obvious: there are lots of independents who have a very negative view of Senator Clinton. Deny it at your own peril. Her vote on Iraq still makes her presumptively ineligible for higher office, as far as I am concerned. A presumption she has worked very hard to rebut, but she has alienated a lot of young voters on this point, and the perception is she will almost do anything to appeal to the center, even when the center goes off the deep end.

Ditto with her hawkish approach to foreign affairs. And yeah, I'll hold my nose and vote for her, as with Senator Kerry, but she is quickly becoming just the lesser of two evils. Not a strong selling point, particularly when her campaign has been very dismissive of young voters. Also, as someone who has an interest and experience in criminal law, probably the truest measure of how "progressive" a candidate is, she fails miserably.

Senator Clinton has done well in the primaries without the youth vote. And yeah, there are more of you. But Senator Clinton has run a campaign that is completely dismissive of young voters. A lot of young voters like Senator McCain.

For example, eric's trust fund comment. It was very similar to the latte drinking comment I heard from a ravenous Clinton supporter.

She has also been dismissive of independent voters, as have commentators on this site. The Democratic Party will always need to reach out to independent voters.

I actually think visiting this site was a mistake in the first place. It is biased to the point of being toxic, much like what DailyKos appears to be for the other side. When I posed the question "Can we all agree that we will vote for the Democratic nominee" in another forum, all I heard was vitrol and "We'll vote for the right candidate." Fair enough. People who do that will drive independents and young voters right into McCain's arms.

Parent

Listen Closely if a candidate woo's the (none / 0) (#179)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:22:58 PM EST

by alienating his/her base he/she will lose I don't care how many independents vote for him/her. And young voters have never, remember we were young and activists back in the 60's, been reliable voters. Besides what is he doing keeping by the young voters from McCain by driving the Older Voters away from the Democratic Party?

Parent

Of course... (none / 0) (#193)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:30:53 PM EST

...she lost Vermont by a pretty hefty margin. So who is taking away the base? What about Wisconsin, which we rely on for the GE, or at least have in the past?

The "base" seems to only matter when Senator Clinton wins, and even then only segments of the base. The "base" doesn't include AAs when that isn't convenient for Senator Clinton's supporters, for example, even though over 90 % of them vote Democrat in the GE. Apparently the anti-war left is not part of the "base" either. The "base" that matters is the same base that selected Senator Kerry.

But as I have said before the party, like the GOP, is only an empty apparatus where competing interests battle it out. If we really wanted "change" we would all align ourselves to a progressive third party candidate divorced from the Washington-Wall Street machine. But it isn't practical or viable so we support establishment candidates.

Parent

And now, after supporting three candidates (none / 0) (#227)
by Cream City on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:04:12 PM EST

in one thread, you want a third party. Yikes.

Parent

: Do you think he will be voting (none / 0) (#228)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:06:11 PM EST

come Nov?

Parent

Obama is at least as much a hawk (none / 0) (#186)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:27:35 PM EST

as Hillary. I cannot take you seriously if you favor Obama on those grounds.

Parent

Fair enough... (none / 0) (#195)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:32:37 PM EST

...she is a hawk in the wrong areas, he is hawkish in the right ones.

Parent

: Actually I don't think he has (none / 0) (#197)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:35:53 PM EST

ever clarified which recent wars he approves of.
Has he ever discussed any of the Balkan wars?
For that matter, does he hold Grenada against his beloved Ronnie Reagan?

Parent

You are wrong (none / 0) (#187)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:27:44 PM EST

about her youth vote outreach. You are wrong about her progressive credentials and you are especially wrong about independents, which she has proven she can win. You really need to research these issues. There seems to be a lot about Clinton that you do not know.

Further, the idea that Clinton is a polarizing makes a great news story, but it doesn't really bear out on the ground. She is overwhelmingly winning core democrats. She is enormously popular. She raised 35mm over 14 days coming off an 11X losing streak. Lastly, if she is so hated, why does she keep winning? Why is the race so tight?

You are also wrong about TL'ers refusing to vote for Obama should he win the nom. There have been some who have waffled, but that has not been the overwhelming theme here.

Listen, I've come down really hard on you tonight and I apologize if its gotten your hackles up. Politics is a contact sport, and a lot of us here have been waging these battles for a while now. The thing that makes us democrats is that we have these discussions in the first place.

Parent

: Youth Appeal (none / 0) (#219)
by Athena on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:58:01 PM EST

Clinton won the youth vote in California. That was underreported.

Parent

law (none / 0) (#207)
by eric on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:40:10 PM EST

Which law school? Not that I am interrogating you, I am just curious. Many of us are lawyers here. I hear the job market is tough lately.

Parent

Oh, my, and now (none / 0) (#224)
by Cream City on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:03:10 PM EST

you may be driven into McCain's arms. Have you read and compared the Republican and Democratic platforms? How can you be for three different candidates in one thread?

Parent

Hey I'm a latte loving liberal! (none / 0) (#137)
by Maria Garcia on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:01:44 PM EST

...actually I prefer cafe au lait. And nobody slurs me by calling me a liberal cause that's what I proudly call myself.

Parent

: I like mine black one sugar (none / 0) (#190)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:30:27 PM EST

and very Strong.

Parent

Now, Alec, this is not adding up (none / 0) (#222)
by Cream City on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:01:05 PM EST

You say you gave Obama money, but you say you're a Clinton supporter, but you keep repeating Republican talking points here . . . and frankly, I just am finding all your contradictions to be odd. Clarify.

Parent

don't forget (none / 0) (#62)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:38:30 PM EST

that bestselling books make a lot of money. Obama's international reputation has been raised by all of this, too. He could pick up a cool million from translation rights alone. Not to mention all those sales from Walmart and Sam's Club (the #1 outlet for paperback books in the US and the #2 outlet for hardcovers, respectively)

Mind you, this was after the race heated up. Before he started getting press, you couldn't give those books away (and he's also had to add a disclaimer that maybe his memory was a bit foggy on the memoir he wrote when he was in his thirties)

Parent

It is odd. . . (none / 0) (#141)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:04:27 PM EST

If they were saving it for after Tuesday, today really would have been the day to roll it out.

Parent

Until we have a nominee (5.00 / 1) (#50)
by Coldblue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:32:52 PM EST

both Clinton and Obama should dedicate at least one-half of their individual campaign stump rhetoric toward undermining McCain's electability in Nov.

Actually. . . (5.00 / 1) (#89)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:48:16 PM EST

the Times was reporting today that as a result of his losses yesterday the Obama campaign is planning to take the focus off of McCain and aim it back at Clinton.

This goes against both what you're advocating and what I also believe -- that Democrats want to see the primaries as auditions for who's best prepared to take on the Republican in the general election.

Parent

If you subscribe to their emails (none / 0) (#57)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:35:11 PM EST

Hillary never mentions opponents. Her emails are short, warm appeals to donate, timely like "Wasn't last night great"?

Obama's are longer and mention his opponents - Hillary and McCain.

Parent

: I get the Hillary (none / 0) (#73)
by Coldblue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:42:42 PM EST

emails, but I haven't subscribed to Obama.
Interesting to know that he has gone after McCain.

Parent

Against McCain (none / 0) (#63)
by eric on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:38:53 PM EST

I agree. And the measure of the best candidate should be which one did the best job of making the case against McCain.

Parent

I just did a GBCW at dKos (5.00 / 4) (#51)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:33:01 PM EST

I am through. Totally utterly disgusted. It feels like the Free republic over there.

I have one post in over three weeks. I'm (5.00 / 3) (#67)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:40:41 PM EST

going to go read your diary because I have respect for you. My few glances today made me feel like I was watching an old friend die. It turns my stomach. (tabbycat in tenn).

I believe you are an Obama supporter and I think it is very hard to watch your fellow supporters go off the deep end. Jeralyn needs to visit there just today to see why we are frustrated. Those people aren't my friends anymore (not all but many).

Parent

: Well (5.00 / 2) (#101)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:51:16 PM EST

I got lots of very nice comments, which made me think that all hope is not lost.

Parent
: I agree Jeralyn might want to (5.00 / 2) (#123)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:58:53 PM EST

check out the photo-doctoring FP posts of Kos himself before declaring comments about it off limits.

Parent

Congratulations! (5.00 / 2) (#82)
by Lena on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:45:55 PM EST

I didn't actually do a GBCW diary over there, but I wrote a comment to the same effect a couple of months ago.

I believe you're an Obama supporter, right? I hope you either feel at home here, or that you find a similar site to talkleft which has the analogs to BTD and Jeralyn (i.e. a "soft" but cantankerous HRC supporter, and a more enthusiastic Obama supporter). LOL.

Parent

: thanks (5.00 / 2) (#102)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:52:14 PM EST

I've been an Armando fan for quite a while. So I am glad to be here. It's nice to see this site so busy.

Parent

It's gotten bad (5.00 / 3) (#93)
by spit on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:49:04 PM EST

Out of all the times kos has managed to royally piss me off, this one is the one that might finally throw me over the edge. Of course, I'd been barely popping in anyway over the last few weeks, since the comments have gotten so vitriolic.

It's gone from biased (fine) to constant spin (meh) to now an utter loss of all connection with reality. The problem with believing your own BS is that eventually reality tends to smack into you, as it did IMO last night and as it will continue to do until people get a grip.

And that post -- with the repeated hammering of the point, just to make sure all dissenters were shouted down thoroughly -- was sickening IMO. Tabloid quality stuff.

Parent

: yup. (5.00 / 1) (#105)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:52:39 PM EST

Parent

you too?? Wow you read mine (none / 0) (#156)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:13:11 PM EST

right? "GBOR"

Parent

: I didn't (none / 0) (#230)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:10:26 PM EST

but I uprated a couple of your hidden comments, because I didn't find them fair in light of the vitriol that was being hurled at you.

Parent

Not to kiss a** but I like TalkLeft (5.00 / 6) (#53)
by catfish on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:33:46 PM EST

First they moderate the threads well, and are not afraid to clean out comments that are off-topic.

It keeps things calm and rational.

: Yes, the moderation is topnotch (5.00 / 3) (#71)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:42:29 PM EST

and CONSISTENT.

Parent

I predict Obama will trail by 20 pts (5.00 / 1) (#76)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:43:32 PM EST

in polls in one month time.
Once the bloom is off this kind of rose, it doesn't come back. Plus, Obama can't go ugly and win; Hillary can, if she wants.

I am thinking of starting a blog (5.00 / 3) (#87)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:47:53 PM EST

for my overflow thoughts as I am crowding this blog with my posts.

I will be cutting down here. Would anyone be interested in reading more of my political stuff in an other forum?

maybe (5.00 / 1) (#95)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:49:33 PM EST

if I can understand it.

Parent

No promises (none / 0) (#104)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:52:31 PM EST

Parent

heh (none / 0) (#121)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:56:49 PM EST

likewise

Parent

Not to worry. BTD always (none / 0) (#185)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:26:52 PM EST

but always points out when the commenter missed the point.

Parent

: I noticed that! (none / 0) (#206)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:39:41 PM EST

Parent

You could call it (5.00 / 2) (#97)
by Coldblue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:50:10 PM EST

Swords Crossed...

ducking for cover

Parent

Heh (5.00 / 3) (#103)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:52:16 PM EST

That should have been a great blog.

Parent

: it was fun at first. (5.00 / 1) (#109)
by coigue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:53:08 PM EST

Parent

Question. . . (5.00 / 1) (#111)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:53:56 PM EST

which "you" would conduct the blog. Talk Left-you or old Daily Kos-you?

Parent

Hmmm (5.00 / 1) (#116)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:55:32 PM EST

Probably Talk Left me. I ruthlessly delete and suspend people here instead of getting into pointless arguments with them.

It is a better system for me.

Parent

I'm sure you'll do very well. (5.00 / 1) (#161)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:15:30 PM EST

My impression is that traffic here has been increasing rapidly and I'm sure it's connected with the civil tone that's enforced as much as with the high quality of material.

Parent

: You don't attribute the increase in (none / 0) (#200)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:36:59 PM EST

traffic to BTD's plan?

Parent

It is a better system (none / 0) (#148)
by Coldblue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:06:39 PM EST

for all of us.

Although you are a definite boon for blog comments.

You are an interesting blog persona. A magnet, to be sure.

Parent

A troll magnet (none / 0) (#181)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:25:21 PM EST

it seems like some of the times.

Parent

: Famous Boxers (none / 0) (#199)
by squeaky on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:36:45 PM EST

Have the same problem. The ambitious younger ones always want to try to humiliate them.

Parent
: You take a position (none / 0) (#201)
by Coldblue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:37:22 PM EST

and defend it.
Keep on keeping on.

Parent

Well, Larry, first just let me (none / 0) (#192)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:30:37 PM EST

say that is an excellent question.

Parent

I'll follow you aywhere BTD but I hope (5.00 / 1) (#120)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:56:33 PM EST

you post at both.

Go Vols! Can you get the game where you are?

Parent

Only if profanity is encouraged as well (5.00 / 2) (#132)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:00:47 PM EST

as potshots at other bloggers.

Parent

But, NO cat pictures! (5.00 / 2) (#145)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:06:13 PM EST

Parent

Oh, and lots and lots of Rezko. (none / 0) (#194)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:31:37 PM EST

Parent

I'm depressed now. He said he will be (none / 0) (#204)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:38:24 PM EST

posting less and I remember when he took a break in December and I didn't like it.

His Gators are absolutely on fire. Hitting every shot, so he should be happy right now.

Parent

: Psst. Bait and switch. (none / 0) (#211)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:43:45 PM EST

Remember how we just kicked in for that new server? Perhaps our contributions are portable like HRC's health insurance plan?

Parent

Only if you have (none / 0) (#142)
by andgarden on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:04:45 PM EST

threaded comments (i.e. soapblox/scoop). I can't stand the single, sequental, comment system that you see most places.

Otherwise I'd read, but probably only by RSS.

Parent

Are those systems expensive? (none / 0) (#150)
by Teresa on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:07:26 PM EST

Parent

: I think soapblox is doing freebees now. (5.00 / 1) (#151)
by andgarden on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:08:07 PM EST

Parent

sure, i for one enjoy your (none / 0) (#188)
by hellothere on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:27:52 PM EST

diaries and comments. this is such a strange period i don't think any of us would have predicted.

Parent

Depends on your hook... (none / 0) (#234)
by Oje on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:30:45 PM EST

I had TalkLeft bookmarked 2-4 years ago as a civil liberties blog, but it changed its front page into a busy newspaper-like screen at some point (if memory serves). I found it hard to target what interested me and stopped reading it regularly. I came back to TalkLeft based on a recommendation at Hullabaloo that indicated this site had not gone bat-guano crazy over Obama after Edwards dropped out. The campaign threads dominate my interest right now.

That said, I think there will be a great opportunity for new blogs to emerge in the coming year because the blog standard bearers burned too many bridges and became too unprincipled during this primary. At least half of the Democratic party and, I suspect, an equal proportion of the netroots will be looking for a new style or voice of reality-based commentary: the Democrats and blog readers who did not recognize the pervasive gender, race, and class issues that seem to trouble many of our high-profile "creative class" bloggers (many of whom embraced the MSM and the Drudgery of right-wing journalism when it suited their preferred candidate). The blogosphere needs more and better voices once again.

But, I also think it is a great opportunity for TalkLeft to expand and bring together party/netroots activism with issues of law, civil liberty, and the incarceration of our citizenry. Nothing will be more important than the Supreme Court in the next 4 years. If Democrats take the three branches of government, then blog readers will need fewer media criticism blogs and more legislative process/public policy blogs. Also--after Florida 2000, Ohio 2004, and now Michigan/Florida 2008--the politics of crime obviously encompasses campaign analysis, criticism of party philosophy, and review of the primary process.

Boy, that started out as a short supportive post....

Parent

Ohio (5.00 / 1) (#209)
by NecSorteNecFato on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:42:36 PM EST

I've been cruising around some of my former blog haunts today, and I've been disturbed to see several "articles" about the racism vote in Ohio (TPM for example). They are making the argument that O lost due to being seen as a "slick black man" by Ohio's white, middle-aged, working class voters.
I have to say something about this, because it rings so false to me as an Ohio resident. I live in NE Ohio, predictably democratic, but I have also lived in Southern Ohio and I think that most white, middle-aged, working class voters, if they claimed a bias, might say they are less inclined to see a woman president than a man of any color. I have no doubt we have plenty of racists, but I think when it comes to signature democratic values that are critical to these voters- union folks, people who need health care, people vitally interested in trade issues- Hillary just plays her cards better.
It's been said many times here that Hillary holds the Dem base, and if there is any state reflective of that base it's Ohio. I think that is a much better and more accurate reason why Hillary won here than claiming these voters just can't bring themselves to cast a ballot for a black politician.

Hoping Ohio has changed, but when I (none / 0) (#213)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:47:09 PM EST

lived in Cincinnati, it felt like living in Norfolk as far as how AAs were perceived and in some cases treated by Caucasians.

Parent

: Cincy (none / 0) (#216)
by NecSorteNecFato on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:53:18 PM EST

is a special case I think....there is long and contentious racial history in that city that continues to play itself out in local politics.
I live in the Akron area and factory job loss continues to be a huge issue for many people here. NAFTA seems more likely to be a factor than racism.

Parent

Lost in other stories .. (5.00 / 1) (#212)
by Robot Porter on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:46:56 PM EST

A few days back I noted that Dkos members fit a pattern of many male Internet uses, saying that they all had World of Warcraft accounts.

For those who don't know, World of Warcraft is an online fantasy role-playing game. A graphical Dungeons and Dragons if you will. It's subscriber-based and has 10 million active users.

This diary about the death of the creator of Dungeons and Dragons was posted yesterday. Election day. And still got 200 reponses.

Nothing wrong with Dkos being full of gaming geeks. But I think it helps us to understand who these people are and why they behave in the ways they do.

Sure, they may make decent salaries and have advanced degrees. But at heart they're just a bunch of lonely guys hanging out on the Internet all day.

In short, they're more comparable to this than this.

And now, on to Rachel Maddow (5.00 / 1) (#232)
by Cream City on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:16:10 PM EST

who is such another sad loss. Tonight on Abrams' show (bless him for raising so many questions that need to be addressed), Maddow said that Clinton on SNL was "trying to make herself human." Does Maddow even realize what she says? She is smart, so I have to think so. But she must have been hanging with KO and the Boyz for far too long. Maddow can't imagine that Clinton has -- as she does, as I saw more than a decade ago when I first saw her speak and then interact with folks -- a great sense of humor.

sorry, delete my post (none / 0) (#5)
by xjt on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:09:22 PM EST

Since this is an open thread... (none / 0) (#6)
by LatinoVoter on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:09:42 PM EST

isn't there a plugin for WordPress that kicks out comments if they're found to have profanity in them?

That one guy in the thread below really got out of line and was really disgusting. I know they act like that at DK but no need to accept that kind of behavior here.

I have a question (none / 0) (#19)
by zyx on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:18:03 PM EST

I got a mailer from the Obama campaign thanking me for my donation. I tossed it and didn't think much about it. Then I got a call, and that made me testy. It also made me think more. The called said they had me down for a $100 donation for Obama. I am a Clinton supporter.

Does anyone know

--is this just a usual flattery tactic?

--or, is it possible that a maxed-out donor made a small donation (under $200 won't show at the FEC website) in my name? I didn't have the wit to ask the caller about the particulars of that supposed "donation". I am listed at the FEC website as a Dem donor, with a previous donation under the maximum to the Kerry campaign.

Any thoughts? Am I being too touchy about it? The call came just the Texas Obama-Clinton debate, and I was really wishing for better luck for Clinton than for Obama, and pretty much told that caller as much.

Confusion... (none / 0) (#26)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:20:17 PM EST

...over names, lists, numbers, addresses, etc. I was originally a Clinton supporter so I still get stuff from her.

Parent

: Believe me (none / 0) (#32)
by zyx on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:23:05 PM EST

my name cannot be confused with anyone else's.

Parent

Obama support of Palestines question (none / 0) (#69)
by Saul on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:41:06 PM EST

I heard that Obama was sort of a champion for the Palestinians, but after he started running for the nomination he threw them under the bus and went and gave a speech in front of AIPAC in order to get their support. Any truth to this? If so is there a link?

No. (5.00 / 1) (#98)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:50:35 PM EST

Assuming that your question is genuine and not purely provocative, Obama has been a consistent supporter of Israel's right to peace and security while not ignoring the suffering of the Palestinians. I don't believe there's been any significant change in his position on I/P relations since he started running for President.

Parent

Obama did meet with editors of Jewish press, (none / 0) (#138)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:03:32 PM EST

who were concerned about his support for Palestinian causes in the Chicago area b/4 he started his run for Dem. Pres. nominee. He assured the editors that, as Pres. he would support a strong state of Israel. No info as to whether he continues working on behalf of Palestinian causes now.

Parent

One thing about Obama I have been learning (none / 0) (#143)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:05:05 PM EST

is that he will speak according to who his audience is.

Parent

: FLA Res (none / 0) (#165)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:16:57 PM EST

exactly--every step of his campaign is run to win the election directly ahead of him. IA and NH: talk up his transcending race. SC: make it about racial empowerment. NV: play to the conservatives. Super Tues hits and he can't play to the diverse crowd so he sticks with what will get him the delegates by talking up the conservative crap and sounding like the original latte sipping Harvard guy. Each step has been carefully planned to woo a particular demographic. This is why he doesn't want to go "back" to Florida. He was supposed to have this tied up before the Rezko trial started. Remember when it got postponed? Mighty convenient.
Lots of uncontrollable stuff is popping up now besides Rezko: the Nation of Islam members working on his senate campaign staff, the horrible Farrakhan "endorsement," the Muslim photo flap, the foreign relations committee (is it still a committee if you never hold a meeting?) the NATO flap--typical playing to one side while appeasing another, only this time he got caught.
The campaign is starting to unravel, and they can't go back in the short amount of time a FL and MI revote would take and rebuild those bridges.

Parent

He was much stronger on Palestinian rights (none / 0) (#147)
by LatinoVoter on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:06:39 PM EST

before he ran for President. Here in IL it is pretty easy to be a supporter or sympathizer but he had to tone it down for the primary and the GE.

Parent

Delegates (none / 0) (#84)
by mouth of the south on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:46:59 PM EST

I just checked the DNC website to see what their official delegate count is(both pledged and super delegates). According to the DNC, Clinton's total is 1445.5 and Obama's is 1590. The news shows all seemed to have different numbers which is the reason that I went to the DNC site because I thought it would be more official. Now that means that Obama is 144.5 delegates ahead after last night, not including the Texas caucus votes which are still being counted. And there is another thing that has been puzzling me. Clinton wants to have the Florida and Michigan delegates seated. I agree with her on this, but does she realize what that would mean for her? She would no longer need 2024 pledged and super delegates, but would now need 2193! It seems that counting Florida and Michigan or having do-overs would not help her that much. Am I wrong?

: Yes (none / 0) (#91)
by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:48:31 PM EST

Parent
: Yes, you are wrong. (none / 0) (#108)
by LarryInNYC on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:53:00 PM EST

Regardless of whether FL and MI are counted, and how, neither candidate will win a majority of delegates based on pledged delegates alone.
However, counting FL and MI will help Clinton close the gap with Obama in terms of pledged delegates and popular vote and perhaps even take the lead in the popular vote. That in turn will help influence the super delegates who will decide the nomination.

Parent
: And MSNBC, no friend of HRC (none / 0) (#231)
by Cream City on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:12:16 PM EST

had the difference between their delegate counts at only 61 yesterday -- before the big wins last night. The delegate counts are all over the place, in part because most caucus states are several steps away from having actual counts. And most of those caucus states allow switching at each step to another candidate. Seriously. That's why Obama's count is "soft," and we can't let any count be considered as a basis for pushing out either candidate. Hers could go up -- but so could his -- when those caucus states finally hold the last step, this summer, before the national convention.

Parent

Oh I don't actually think she WILL go (none / 0) (#112)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:54:07 PM EST

ugly... it's just that she has more room to do so than Obama. She is not promising that she is anything but a very tough fighter.
The demanding that Hillary reveal the tax returns is very weak. If Obama repeats THAT as his main attack for a month, he could be down 30 points.

Agree (none / 0) (#157)
by Coldblue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:13:27 PM EST

btw, Steve Soto had a great post about throwing Obama a curve.

Parent

: Wrong link (none / 0) (#163)
by Coldblue on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:16:34 PM EST

correct link

Parent
: Change your link, CB (none / 0) (#166)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:17:11 PM EST

delete the "mailto" at the beginning.

Parent

Bush Returned The Favor (none / 0) (#114)
by squeaky on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:55:05 PM EST

And endorsed McCain today. That is 1000 times worse than Farrakahan endorsing Obama in my book. McCain now officially wears the GOP disasters of the last seven years around his neck, an onus that will sink him.

Hope Bush starts campaigning for him. A little guitar accompaniment perhaps?

Bush says he'll be the #1 campaigner. (none / 0) (#144)
by oculus on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:05:13 PM EST

Great news.

Parent

: St John McBush (none / 0) (#184)
by squeaky on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:26:49 PM EST

Bush did a tap dance McCain, he was so happy. Then he proceeded to talk over the guy:

Bush just endorsed McCain and sounded like he's on a meth bender. He couldn't let McCain have the spotlight.
If I were McCain I'd be hoping that's the last time I have to appear with Junior during this campaign. He's a reminder of everything people loathe about Republicans. St. John didn't look too comfortable, I must say. (But then he never does...)
digby
C & L has the video if you can stand to watch.

Parent

Don't Want To Quibble But (none / 0) (#221)
by john horse on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:00:54 PM EST

re: "That is 1000 times worse than Farrakahan endorsing Obama in my book."

Agree with what you said squeaky but I have to point out an important difference between Bush and Hagee's endorsement of McCain and Farrakhan's endorsement of Obama.

McCain sought Bush and Hagee's endorsement. Obama did not.

Parent

: What An Idiot (none / 0) (#225)
by squeaky on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:03:21 PM EST

McCain is then. Did not know that.

Parent

Alec82 do you know who (none / 0) (#122)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 07:58:33 PM EST

Penny Pritzker is?

Perception (none / 0) (#127)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:00:00 PM EST

Hmmm...Kathy, a supporter of Senator Clinton, suggested that, with regards to the Rezko affair, it is all about perception. I suggest that all politics is often about perception. So here is the question:

Against Senator McCain, who will be perceived as the more independent candidate?

Against Senator McCain, who will be perceived as the more honest candidate?

Against Senator McCain, who will be perceived as the more experienced candidate? (this one is a no-brainer: neither)

Against Senator McCain, who will be perceived as having the most credibility on Iraq?

Against Senator McCain, who will be perceived as the candidate willing to do anything to win?

I'm just asking about perception. Truth, it seems, is irrelevant.

Neither of those is answered with Obama (5.00 / 1) (#139)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:03:33 PM EST

Parent

And none... (none / 0) (#167)
by Alec82 on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:17:36 PM EST

...leads to a response of Senator Clinton, as against Senator McCain.

Parent

: That is arguable. (none / 0) (#182)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:25:30 PM EST

Parent

Against Senator McCain (none / 0) (#152)
by Kathy on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:08:51 PM EST

who has shown they can handle being attacked, outspent, out media'd and out volunteered and still keep fighting for core democratic values-and keep winning the important swing states?

(psst: Clinton)

Parent

Please tell me that Axelrod is no (none / 0) (#176)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:22:17 PM EST

longer a genius.
Did he lose his cool on TV today at all?

Bottom line is,however.... (none / 0) (#189)
by sef on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:30:05 PM EST

Hillary didn't get as many as she needed last night & if she doesn't do better than expected in PA, NC, KY, W.Va, Ind & (hopefully) the Mich/FL redos, she's done. Obama is likely to be the nominee, like it or not. Last night was HRC's best chance (and she gave the best fight I have seen in any election in the last 10 years in the last 10 years), and she didn't do it.

&, for what its worth, kos does have a point. Clearly no one with a brain in Hillary's campaign would intentionally darken the photos, but nonetheless it was done. Whether intentional or not (and my heart & head tells me not), someone in charge should have caught this before it went out to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. The problem with playing hardball (and she has played it masterfully in the last 10 days), is that when there is a slip-up(and the darkened photos clearly were not purposefully done by HRC's management) everyone assumes the worst.

With that said, as most know I am a dyed in the wool kool-aid drinking Obama man, but I would really, really be proud to have a fighter like HRC has shown herself to be in the last 10 days as our next president. Hillary has been Hillary and not the Hillary her advisers want her to be the last few days, I've missed her & glad to see or fighter is back.

Bottom line is,however.... (none / 0) (#191)
by sef on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:30:33 PM EST

You know, photos are darkened all (none / 0) (#202)
by MarkL on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:37:53 PM EST

the time to make the other guy look more sinister.
Racism has nothing to do with it.
I'm not saying that I agree the change was intentional, but if it was? So what.
It's not racist.
If Obama cannot answer the substance of that ad, he should not be the nominee.

Parent

: You Are Kidding (none / 0) (#218)
by squeaky on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:55:32 PM EST

If the allegations were true, making Obama darker it would be super nasty and a rotten low down move. If you really think that it is business as usual, in this particular race, you have ODed on Kool Aid.

Parent

I think we need another open thread (none / 0) (#210)
by Florida Resident on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 08:42:55 PM EST

Abrams gave Hilary credit (none / 0) (#220)
by Saul on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 09:00:35 PM EST

when he states that all the pundits say the only reason she did so good was because she went negative yet he has the exit polls from Texas and Ohio that show that 55 to 60 percent say it was because of her and how she shows she is fighter a positive sign of a leader, etc etc. None of the exit polls show one mention that they voted due to any negative ad. Abrams point is the pundits, to include those on his panel, just hate to give her any credit that it was due to her good character and she won for no other reason because she is Hilary and voter just liked her for who she was. Abrams states that when Obama wins its because his is charismatic, because he can draw the crowd, etc etc. I have come to the conclusion that the owners of MSNBC have give the green light to guys like tweety and oberman to destroy Hilary, and they only put Abrams who support her as a decoy so divert you from their real plot of Hilary's destruction. No owner of a tv media station worth his salt would have allowed them to this to Hilary unless he was in on it.

An Evening Open Thread | 234 comments (234 topical)

An Evening Open Thread

The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

Menu

Search

Login

Creator and Principal Author

TL Alumni

Contribute To TalkLeft

Sections

Site Credits

Legal