Letters to the Editor
-
Chicago
These debates have become a total waste of time. Personally, I'd rather see a debate between O'Reilly and Olbermann or between Chris Dodd and O'Reilly.
In fact the best debate I can think of would be between Greta Van Sustrend and Billo...
-
Nothing About Capitulation on the Wiretap Bill?
Not a single question asking about congressional Democrats caving in to the new wiretap bill? Nothing about restoring constitutional protections? Nothing about the erosion of liberty in the erstwhile "land of the free"?
Oh look, there's a Glenn Greenwald interview at YearlyKos with Chris Dodd on FISA, habeas corpus, and Democratic capitulation. The very things I want to hear about. Too bad all the candidates couldn't be asked the same batch of questions at once.
Maybe this is more evidence of the declining importance of the MSM and the rising importance of grassroots newscasting and commentary, e.g., blogging.
I am so disappointed with the Democratic Party.
-
Actual Light Versus Simple Heat
Comparing the Democratic candidates debating issues of gravitas, meaning and substance to the Republican candidates debating which of them is holier, gets IMs from Jesus or has deeper stigmata, I'll take the Democrats every single time.
-
What you missed while watching the AFL-CIO sponsored Democratic debate
There was a Dirty Jobs marathon on Discovery Channel, including the one where Mike hauls a taciturn crawfish catcher in a boat, through the shallow Louisiana swamp. Also! - On PBS there were two episodes of Eastenders (we're 4-5 years behind) where Mel and Phil deal with each other following Steve's death in the burning car.
-
Somebody named John Sweeney
You know, if we're going to get all huffy about the importance of union labor, we should probably act like we know the person who's been the leader of one of the biggest unions in the country since 1995. Sweeney's election was a major turning point in the re-politicization of the AFL-CIO, as anyone who remembers the days of Lane Kirkland will tell you, and he's done more than almost anyone to reinvigorate labor as a political force in this country. I'd say he's more than just a squinty boss with a funny voice.
-
Dirty Jobs
You know, I was happier watching Mike tackle the Mackinaw bridge and a Nasa crawler. Makes you wonder when someone is going to e-mail Mike with an offer for the dirtiest of dirty jobs; presidential hopeful. "Well, that line of platitudes is so clean I'd eat off it"
-
Why is Scherer writing this?
I can't quite understand your attitude, Mikey - the snotty, snooty, I-coulda-done-it-better attitude, I mean. Wasn't there ANYthing of importance said last night, by your lights?
I saw seven people trying to get a message across, and Olbermann handling a tough assignment pretty well, all considered. With varying results, and varying levels of candor, it's true - but you doing that bitchy thing all over them just seems kinda...pathetic? Reaching? Trying for relevance?
I'll await your "analysis" of the next Repug debate to see if you're like this again, or if you fall into worshipful mode.
-
Clinton's "epic lead in the polls"
Decent numbers, but what percentage of those polled were Democrats? Because we know exactly who the Republicans want to run against.
-
Epic polls?
From last week's Rasmussen Reports polls:
Direct Match-ups (of registered likely voters)...
- Clinton - 45% Giuliani - 46%
- Obama - 47% Giuliani - 41%
- Edwards - 49% Giuliani - 42%
- Clinton - 45% Thompson - 46%
- Obama - 46% Thompson - 43%
- Edwards - 50% Thompson - 39%
So...to re-iterate...Ms. Clinton is behind both Guiliani AND Thompson and Obama and Edwards are ahead of both...significantly!
So, who do you think the Dems would be pulling for for their nomination? Obama? Edwards? No!!!
(of registered likely Democrat voters)
- Clinton - 43%
- Obama - 21%
- Edwards - 12%
I personally find Obama so refreshing because he is both electable and a candidate to vote FOR, not the lesser of two evils.
I can't stand it!! Why do we keep running from victory?????
-
High Level Dumbing Down
What does it say about America when even a daily that claims to speak to an intelligent, well-read, nuance friendly crowd has a recurring feature that highlights how they have one reporter watch the debates so no one else in America needs to? Articles like this are a smack in the face to the work of people like Sidney Blumenthal and Joe Conason.
-
Time to rethink this common misconception
"Clinton's 'epic lead in the polls'
Decent numbers, but what percentage of those polled were Democrats? Because we know exactly who the Republicans want to run against."
The Republicans are afraid of Hillary Clinton. She's the only one that has the experience, via her husband's electoral vicotries, of beating the Republicans for the presidency in the past 25 years. As she said last night, she has been fighting the right wing for 15 years and she knows how to come out on top. Does anyone actually think that the Republicans are afraid of inexperienced Obama or angry Edwards? Please, people, look at how this race is taking shape. Hillary is making in-roads on a daily basis with people who would have never thought of voting for her. The polls bear this out. Wake up! The Republicans don't know how to govern but they sure know how to win elections. Hillary can beat these people. Stop looking for the perfect candidate. As Bruce Springsteen once said, "don't spend your life waiting for a moment that just don't come." No one will ever live up to the ideals we all seem to insist upon in our candidates. The goal is to win back the presidency. Then we can work on what's important to us.
Hillary can (and will) win the presidency in 2008. Stop negating what is happening right before your eyes.
Do you want a Democrat taking the oath of office in 2009? Then support Hillary. Do you want a fractious Democratic party tripping over itself just to please Salon readers, et al.? Then please continue to tout these other pretenders. Salon readers remind me of Cindy Sheehan, who in her fervor to stop the war is threatening to run against Nancy Pelosi. Sure, she's right about the issue. But being right isn't the point. Being smart is. Nominate the person who can win and then work on the issues. Hillary's our girl. Accept it. Work for her. Make it happen.
-
Arosenbaum, you clearly didn't read "War Room" today
Clinton leads Giuliani in swing state poll
Four hundred fifty-some days before the 2008 election, we get a little queasy when we see the words "Florida," "Pennsylvania" and "Ohio" in the same sentence, let alone in the same poll.
Here we go, anyway.
In a Quinnipiac University swing state poll out this morning, Hillary Clinton holds slim, within-the-margin-of-error leads over Rudy Giuliani in Florida and Pennsylvania and is tied with him in Ohio.
In other possible matchups, Giuliani holds small leads over Barack Obama in Florida and Ohio and a larger lead over him in Pennsylvania, but both Obama and Clinton hold big leads over Fred Thompson in all three states.
Quinnipiac's Peter Brown says the big news here is that Clinton seems to be picking up support from people who didn't use to think much of her. "Not only does she lead by a nose in two of the most important swing states in the Electoral College, but she is turning around independent and Republican voters who previously viewed her negatively," Brown says in a Quinnipiac press release. "In the last two months the share of voters who view her favorably has increased to about 50 percent -- an important milestone -- while the numbers who view her unfavorably has dropped. It is not huge movement, but it is consistent across all three states."