Letters to the Editor
-
Nothing To Add
Joan: I think you should say something to those who keep naming you and Salon as the bad guys. Okay, I'll tell you what, I'll do it for you.
Attention Bird Brains: Stop shooting the messenger. Or, if you want to be part of the debate--add something instead of play take it away. Don't be afraid to shut up if you have nothing to add on a particular day, week, month, or year. You won't be missed. And don't be afraid to read and think before you write.
There is enough going on so it isn't necessary to confuse the issue with infantile projections. (But do these dumb-dumbs even know what projection is?)
At any rate, I tried. (I'm just glad you stopped prefexing Chris Matthews as your "friend". The guy is a Neanderthal and I'll bet you he shows up on Fox someday.)
-
Flawed Logic
I get the premise Joan but your logic is fundamentally flawed: The fight is already nasty and already has hurt the Democratic Party. Hillary Clinton is actively trying to lower Obama's "positives" by going very nasty. Case in point is yesterday's worthless rehashing of the Wright Affair which was nothing more than a blatant attempt to distract attention from her own problems. Obama reacts in kind, playing to the real belief in many quarters (including democratic ones) that the Clintons are not honest people and cannot be trusted. The total effect? "Wow are those democrats a bunch of bungling losers." That's why Joe Scarborough is so very happy this fistfight is going on. BTW, you can't call it a battle when only one person has a realistic shot at winning. It's just a brawl.
-
@W.E.S. - RE: As I've Said Before
Curious, what are you basing your prediction on?
-
the logic
Hi Joan,
It seems clear that we can- at this point- read the "data" in almost any way we wish. And I agree with you that it is important to remember that it is simply not a fact that, so far, the general election is being harmed.
But just to say: Is there any doubt that, at this point, if Hilary did pull out (or Barak dropped out; but why?)is there much reason to fear that her dropping out would hurt Barak's chances?
But more importantly:
Why do we connect a nice bump in democratic voter registration with the flat hope that this will translate into the general election? Isn't it more useful to focus our attention on that rather small demographic of folks who really could vote either way in the general and ask how are they affected by Hilary and Barak engaging in an increasingly negative exchange? To me it seems clear that the outcome of the general election is much more a function of this small group than anything we might say about increased registration.
In my opinion this primary is no cutting away votes from that bizzare and rather small demographic that determines the outcome of the general election. Thanks.
-
What
Prediction?
-
HELPING the party???!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
They have GOT to be kidding! Look at the polls...the longer Obama and Hillary argue and fight among themselves, the better it looks for McCain.
The longer the two Democratic candidates fight, the more McCain looks good to the voters...and that is the simple truth.
-
Chris Matthews...
Chris Matthews: So we all know Hilary Clinton eats little children and has Satan on speed dial...Dark forces are at work if she gets the nomination...I don't think Anti-Christ would be too harsh a word to describe her. Water boils when she walks by and toads fall from the sky...
Talking head # 2 - So you're backing Obama right?
Chris Matthews: What you talkin bout Willis?
cut to commercial...
-
The long primary is pushing me to McCain
The more negatives on HRC and OHB, the better McCain looks.
Voter registration is meaningless if they don't vote. HRC's campaign organization in Wisconsin was woeful, as was Obama's in California. I see no evidence of that changing. They can't get out the vote with a shovel.
My primary vote was meaningless in 1996, 2000, and 2004. The republic survived.
We should have everyone vote in the Super Tuesday primary and be done with it. And that primary should be in April.
The crossovers in Mississippi voted for Clinton, according to Newsweek. The only data I've seen has crossovers hating Obama, and implied racial bias, not Republican evil genius. All in all, I think Joan is inaccurate here. This longer fight is hurting Clinton and Obama.
I know it's made me fully hate them all. The Obamaites and the Clintonites can shut up until they promise to back an airline passenger bill of rights.
-
The primary "battle" and the real battles in Iraq
Walsh is of course shilling for Clinton, and that's her right.
What bothers me is Walsh and Clinton's callousness toward our soldiers. The upcoming war votes are going to be politicized not just between the Democrats and Republicans--which could actually lead to more carefully considered policy--but within the Democratic party. And I suspect that may be a disaster.
We already know that Clinton is willing to send soldiers to be killed to increase her political viability (not to mention Iraqi men, women, and children). I shudder to consider how she will calculate her votes this summer.
Maybe it's just part of her plan to edge out Obama--use his conscience against him.
-
if newsweek says it, it must be true
republican evil geniuses: rush limbaugh, newt gingrich, karl rove.
they succeeded because of their use of dirty tricks such as cross over voting, etc.
-
@W.E.S. - RE: As I've Said Before - 2
Your post on this article and many of your recent posts about the election in general indicate to me that you don't believe Obama will win against McCain in the November 2008 contest.
I'd like to know what you basing this belief on?
-
I'm Listening To The Obama People
THEY say they are not going to win. And it's Hillary's fault.
-
I am taking to reposting posts....
This isn't Hollywood
[Read the article: Let 'em duke it out]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]
------------------
There is no such thing as bad publicity might work for starlets, but I am not sure it is going to work for our election process. The more this drags out, the more bad publicity will be hoisted upon both candidates. McCain is out of the frey, and may pick up steam later in the season when it counts.
With lights constantly shown on both candidates it puts a pressure on them to never never slip up. These are public servents, not actors working with scripts.
I have my doubts that this is good for the general electorate. It's good for the individual states involved with a primary at that time as it generates a temporary excitment, it's good for the media that feeds on this process, but I don't think this is good for the rest of us.
Permalink Friday, March 7, 2008 06:08 AM
----------
See? All I need to do is cut and paste from one pundit to another. Viola!