http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-rush-holt/whats-really-in-the-rest_b_74309.html

Mr. Klein is correct that Republicans will try to misrepresent the RESTORE Act as "civil rights for terrorists." They have already used these scare tactics and will continue to make false, hyperbolic statements about the bill. However, protecting Americans is too important for Democrats to allow such scurrilous attacks to lead them to sacrifice legislation that adheres to the principles that are necessary to protect Americans.

I just can't fathom how the Dem "leaders", you know, all those people running for Pres, are "united" by taking the same position: no to telco immunity.

Hence, this is de-facto, our party platform. How are there so many defections? Do you see any, ANY, republicans coming down on our side of this? The betrayal is unfathomable.

So assuming worst case scenario in that the Senate passes telco immunity, the House gives it up in committee and it is signed into law. Isn't it true that the lawsuits can just appeal all the way up to the SCOTUS and potentially get a ruling on the constitutionality of the law?

That would seem like our last hope.

Sorry to burst the bubble. But not to worry, Sheldon Whitehouse is on the case.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/18/71611/089/391/423700

In his first editorial for the NY Times, in the first paragraph, he makes the definitive statement: "There will be no Clinton Restoration."

Uh huh. Brilliant insight and political calculation there, Billy.

Is that it wouldn't have been out of character for him to go with the "Don't get too comfortable, we all know what the 'Vaunted Clinton Machine' is capable of. They still may destroy him" meme. But of course, in typical fashion of being absolutely wrong about everything, he didn't.

I think from this point until November, I'm going to read everything he writes and then go directly over to InTrade and bet the opposite. And then retire in December. Thanks Billy!

You can't just swipe a broad brush and say "the polls were wrong, therefore all polls are wrong". Several points:

1) The polls were somewhat "wrong" in predicting this race, but look at the variability, fluctuations, volatility, and numerous factors which went into the polling. You had Clinton ahead in NH for months until the Rasmussen 1/4-5/08 poll (http://www.pollster.com/08-NH-Dem-Pres-Primary.php) which was the first post-Iowa poll. And the actual election was held just three days later. That is much different than, say, Bush's approval ratings which have been consistently mired in the 30's for more than a year. The trend is more important than a point-in-time snapshot

2) The actual election results are no different than any other poll, with the exception of the margin of error. In the case of an election, the MOE is 0. Just because an actual vote didn't follow the last snapshot doesn't prove polling invalid. It proves that statistical calculations for MOE as well as *gasp* people changing there minds in a high-information environment, can alter poll results. That's the nature of the world we live. That's why there's an MOE for every poll.

3) The last Suffolk poll before the vote (http://www.suffolk.edu/offices/20580.html#anchor26063) had it 39/35 Obama with a 4.38 +/- MOE. What does that mean? It means the poll was RIGHT. With the actual results 39/37 Clinton, it means the poll WAS WITHIN THE MARGIN OF ERROR.

4) The last poll available to Billy, assuming he drafted his column on Sunday evening, would have been the Fox poll (PDF: http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/FOX_NH-3_JAN_web.pdf). This poll had it 32/28 Obama, with an MOE of +/- 4%. So again, it was WELL within the MOE.

So while none of the polls were "right", neither were they so "wrong" that it was appropriate to dig the Clinton grave and stomp on it. I don't know of any other "journalist" or pundit who did this on the left, especially on such platforms as the NYT and a front-page article of a rag, but would love to see some references.