There’s a crazy new Doug Schoen/Pat Caddell piece that I’m not going to link to. I’ll let Steve M. do the honors:
Look, I’m not going to rise to the bait by responding seriously to the new Wall Street Journal op-ed by Fox-News-Democrat pollsters Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen, in which they assert that President Obama should step aside and let Hillary Clinton run in his place. They don’t mean a word they say; she’s not going to run, they know it, and they’re fully aware of the fact that they and their friends would eviscerate her if she did. The point of the op-ed isn’t to express an opinion — it’s to trip Obama and the Democrats up. It’s carefully timed to rule the morning political chatter so it can do that. It’s not a contribution to the national dialogue; it’s a leg extended in the aisle as the bullied kid gets up to walk to the front of the classroom.
The thing is this: the story does not seem to be part of the morning chatter. Even Politico and Halperin are ignoring it.
The first rule of trolling is that you do not talk about trolling. And when you write that Obama should step aside and let Hillary run, you are, in effect, talking about trolling. It’s too damn obvious.
Also too: Caddell and Schoen have been banished from Fred Hiatt’s house of faux seriousness and now reside in Paul Gigot’s house of overt neo-fascism. That also makes people ignore them more.
Those two should have stuck to “white working class Appplebee’s dads hate Obama and hippies blah blah blah”. Hiatt would have kept running that shit forever and Halperin/Politico/Morning Joe would follow along too.
Samara Morgan
no, the first rule of trolling is ABT– always be trolling.
bye DougJ.
best witches, i learned a lot from you.
not all of it good.
:)
c u n d gulag
Modern Conservatism has been reduced to one thing:
Anything and everything that pisses off the Liberals/Democrats.
If Jesus Christ himself ran as a Democrat, they’d all vote for Satan, claiming that he fell from grace for their states and gun rights, and their right to control their women folk ‘n chillin’s.
And Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen are two Kochsuckers, who’ll turn any trick for a buck.
And if Hillary did indeed run, they’d be among the first to label her a man-eating, man-hating, Vincent Foster-shooting, drug-running, lesbian. And I think the capital letters in ‘Citizens United, Not Timid,’ describe these two wastes of oxygen perfectly – my apologies in advance to people with vagina’s everywhere.
These two assholes make Judas look like Jesus.
Ok, clowns, you got your pieces of silver.
Now you can sit down and STFU again for awhile.
I’m sure your pimps will notify you when next they require your services.
Social Outcast
As a republican op-ed writer, you know you’ve jumped the shark when even the loathsome Mark Helprin won’t push this kind of schtick for you.
smith
Pat Caddell? What a ****ing troll he is. A fake Democrat who plays concern troll every now and then. If he told me the sky was blue I wouldn’t believe him. That fact that he even gets a paycheck ticks me off.
Zifnab
It’s also kinda old hat. This would be like running an Op-Ed questioning Obama’s birth certificate again. We already did the “Hillary/Obama death match!” back in ’08. And all the GOP got out of that game was starbursts and moose-slobber.
Half of America has probably forgotten Hillary Clinton still exists, now that Limbaugh/Hannity/Beck aren’t flogging the Queen of the Feminazis meme 24/7. If they wanted to troll properly, they’d at least pick a relevant Dem boogeyman. Why not Nancy Pelosi against Barack Obama in the Dem Primary? Or maybe ultra-reasonable Indiana hometown hero Evan Bayh. Or Jon Stewart. But Hillary? This was just lazy.
DougJ
@Samara Morgan:
You think I’m fucking with you? I am not fucking with you.
jafg
Mercifully I have no clue who these 2 people this blog post refer to. However, being 2 so called ‘Democrats’ in the Faux Noise chicken coop my guess is that this was more a cry out for attention.
Zandar
I see the second tier “publications” are trolling this hard (IDB, American Thinker, the RW noise blogs) but Doug’s right, nobody in Village Centrist land cares. Mainly because last time, Schoen and Caddell were calling for a third party candidate and not Hillary.
On the other hand, Schoen wants us to think the best possible outcome for Obama is the GOP having complete control of Congress.
He’s a real Democrat, that guy.
Woodrowfan
TNFT
different-church-lady
@DougJ: Third prize is, you’re hired. By Fox.
Davis X. Machina
Lazy, but popular among real Democrats.
If the answer to the question isn’t ‘Dennis Kucinich’, then it has to be ‘Hillary Clinton’. Except when it’s ‘Alan Grayson’.
And the beauty of it is that it doesn’t actually matter what the question is.
Ella in New Mexico
Although lets be honest, here: It would be pure fucking genius to switch Joe Biden and Hilary Clinton out for one another. He’d be awesome at State, and, she’d be a terrific VP, not to mention answer to the prayers for all the PUMA-indy’s wavering on the fence. But only if it was perceived as a completely happy, voluntary change both parties agreed to.
We’d pretty much guarantee Obama’s re-election, and could quite possibly hold on to the White House until 2024.
Violet
I have no idea who these people are. I’ll take that as a good thing.
Samara Morgan
@DougJ: you always fucked with me, Troll master.
think of me sometimes.
Wee Bey
@Ella in New Mexico:
Well, no.
lamh31
Mark my words, Tweety will cover this and prob that new chick Alex Wagner too.
This weekend on an interview with Wagner, Tweety said of Obama that he doesn’t seem to like being President, that Obama hasn’t shown graditude for having been “given” the office. He also basically maligned the First Family particularly the First Lady. He said that word on the hill is that she, Malia & Sasha obviously don’t like living in the White House.
Tweety will be all over this.
xian
@Samara Morgan: pro tip on leaving: after you say “bye” you go away.
Samara Morgan
@xian: just tryin’ to beat the pie filter.
but thanx.
Zifnab
@Ella in New Mexico:
No one gives a shit about who the VP and the Sec State are when unemployment is at 9% and the stock market is tanking again. Obama is going to have to fight for every inch of ground in ’12, because he’s not going to have the same allies he had back in ’08. Dems are finally picking sides in the class war, and their not all siding with the GOP. That means Obama is going to be bombarded with Wall Street funded attack ads and news media straight through to November. And a lot of angry independents aren’t going to leap onto the Hopey-Changey bandwagon once they get a taste of everything negative ever said about the President, set to a loop and running for three months straight.
Knockabout
Couldn’t possibly be that Clinton would give the Democrats the best chance of holding the White House and that they’re right, could it?
Naaaaah, doesn’t fit the “Obama or bust” narrative around here. Best not to ask questions or to apply critical thinking skills to the notion that Hillary might energize turnout to record levels.
Wee Bey
@Zifnab:
Well, no.
Gin & Tonic
@Samara Morgan: GBCW? Really?
Yutsano
@Knockabout:
No. But thanks for playing PUMA.
jwest
Pat Caddell and Doug Schoen are only concerned with saving the democrat party.
They are looking at the reality of polls and historical precedent and see that Obama is heading for a Carter-like wave loss. With the reverse coattails effect, democrats will be set back 30 years. Naturally, the country will be in much better shape, but your party will be ruined for decades.
When you’ve lost Chris Mathews, it’s time to give up.
Yutsano
@jwest: O HAI! I was wondering where your smarmy little tail was! I figured you got your butt kicked after your last prognostication died an inglorious death!
MikeJ
@Ella in New Mexico:
No such animal.
PUMAs are disguises donned by trolls. They don’t exist in real life.
jafg
@Knockabout: Ha….you Clintonistas are almost as funny as Paultards. Now time to crawl back under the porch.
Knockabout
Right, Yutsano.
Thank you for proving my point.
Wee Bey
@Knockabout:
Well, no.
Yutsano
@Knockabout: Why does it piss you off so bad that we stand with the duly elected President and refuse to abandon him just because the road is tough? Are you that much of a fair-weather beast? Or you just never supported him in the first place and now you feel superior?
Chiema
@jwest: Not sure if you’re serious…But in case you are, both Bill and Hill “lost” Tweety for a period a time. Tweety hated and attacked Bill all through out the Monica Lewinsky scandal. So yeah, eff Tweety and his opinions. All he does is blow with the wind. His opinions doesn’t mean shit.
Knockabout
The concept that it might be worth exploring Clinton being best is not allowed to even be discussed.
How open minded of you.
Yutsano
@Knockabout: Amazing that we would reject a notion out of hand because it would be destructive and disruptive. READERSHIP CAPTURE! U R NOT TEH TROO LIBZ!!
Joseph Nobles
Obama’s 2012 campaign has received more small donations than all current GOP candidates combined. Obama’s 2012 campaign has currently received more small donations than Obama’s 2008 campaign received.
Yeah, there’s a wave election coming, all right. Notice who’s in the GOP is keeping their surfboards dry and who’s paddling out.
Amir Khalid
@Samara Morgan:
You’re leaving? OH NOES! Who will call me maftoon and put me in my infatuated-with-the-West, not-really-Muslim place now?
Yutsano
@Amir Khalid: I could do it. But it doesn’t have the same fervor I know. :)
RalfW
Even the doubtable James Joyner at OTB says thusly:
Knockabout
Everyone agrees that a Republican president would be awful and that we need to avoid that. But which person gives us the best chance of a Democratic president?
Can the issue even be discussed? No.
Bex
@jwest: Ooooh, your Christmas list is on steroids isn’t it?
Yutsano
@RalfW: He was just a couple threads back defending himself. Not very well I might add.
The Republic of Stupidity
@jwest:
No, j…
It’s “when you’ve FOUND Chris Matthews, it’s time to quit”…
As usual, you’ve got it backwards…
Shalimar
@Knockabout: We discussed it. It was called a primary. What has changed to make us think she would do any better than he has since then?
edited to add: Like many, I am disappointed with Obama in a number of areas. However, in none of those areas do I think Hillary would have done much differently. It takes compromise to be president, including on issues that many of us don’t want compromised.
Dustin
Funny, and here I thought my ex’s mother’s “I hate Obama, I’m voting for Hillary or nobody” rants actually existed. I guess I must have been mistaken.
Either that or you need to step back from the monitor, look around, and reappraise reality. Your call.
The Republic of Stupidity
Heh… interesting Freudian typo there… makes sense when you think about it…
Or perhaps it’s NOT a mistake and Steve meant it that way…
Or perhaps he meant “sheer the sheep of state…”
Whatever… it all works the same way, dunnit?
Knockabout
Why aren’t we having a primary then? Seems like we can do better than selection by accolade.
miwome
Upon reflection, this is an even more apropos lyrics choice than I had thought. Making love with his ego/Ziggy sucked up into his mind
I suppose, per the song, it would help if they could play guitar. I doubt they can, though.
different-church-lady
@Dustin:
Is that when you first realized a personal mistake might have been made?
Monkey Business
@Zifnab: I’m from Indiana. I didn’t always like Evan Bayh as a Senator; a little too much nepotism and not enough gravitas. However, I respected him.
I lost that respect when he started turning tricks on K Street after he left Congress.
Joseph Nobles
@Knockabout: Obama gives us the best chance of a Democratic president. Obama resigning in favor of Hillary would depress African-American turnout and she would lose. Hillary would energize the Tea Party base just as much as Obama does, if not more. Besides, Hillary wouldn’t run. She’s not up for eight more years.
So you can stop your idiotic troll twaddle, Knockabout. It ain’t happening.
ETA: We are having Democratic primaries and caucuses, Knockabout. Has Hillary signed up? No. Why not? Because she doesn’t want to run.
JustMe
Caddell and Schoen have been banished from Fred Hiatt’s house of faux seriousness
What on earth could you possibly do to get tossed off the WaPo op-ed page?
dmsilev
@jwest:
You know, funny thing. Last night I was watching “Point of Order”, a film made up of clips from the Army-McCarthy hearings, and one verbal tick that Sen. McCarthy had was to always refer to the “Democrat party”. I guess you stand with Tailgunner Joe.
La plus ça change…
Omnes Omnibus
… but, man, could they play guitar.
Shalimar
@Monkey Business: He was turning tricks when he was still a Senator, it was just more subtle.
@Knockabout: When has a party ever primaried a sitting President? Only time I can think of was 1980, and that turned out to be a disaster.
Shalimar
@Zifnab:
That isn’t moose-slobber. Ewwwwwwww!
Dustin
@Joseph Nobles: Exactly. Ideological wet dreams from clueless blog commenters with no sense of realpolitik aside, she. is. not. running.
And who, in their right mind, thinks the GOP cares one iota about who the Democratic candidate is? They’ll nuke the economy regardless because they think it’s helping their cause. Their task masters have stepped over the bounds and given the party to true believers. There’s no helping the GOP at this point, they’re either going to win or burn the place down trying.
Amir Khalid
The WSJ piece by Caddell and Schoen is pretty damn strange. They want a presidential candidate who has already said, in no uncertain terms, that she no longer wants the office. Whose polling numbers might look better than Obama’s, but reflect on what people think of her as Secretary of State; those numbers would surely look very different if she were a declared candidate for president.
As for this bit — come on, man.
The Republican party’s opposition to anything and everything the other party proposes, even if they once supported it themselves, has been nihilistic and spiteful. It is risible to argue that Hillary in the Oval Office rather than Obama would make one whit of difference.
Citizen_X
@Knockabout:
The incumbent fucking President, you paid troll too incompetent to pose as a moron.
TuiMel
This Hillary v. Obama meme is a right wing wet dream. In the summer of 2010 my very conservative brother “guaranteed” me that Hillary would resign by Labor Day to begin her challenge of “this not ready for prime time president.” I still remember the look on his face when I told him he was full of it – in case you are wondering, Knockabout, it was shock and disappointment. Hillary will NOT placate the purists to the left of me, nor will she have a better chance of garnering my vote than the president have. In 2012 I will be a yellow dog Dem when it comes to presidential politics. Your little thought experiment is not constructive, but go ahead and think that it is.
DougJ
@Omnes Omnibus:
Well hung and snow white tan.
different-church-lady
@Amir Khalid:
We might be missing the point here: it’s not to champion Hillary, it’s to reinforce the ‘Obama is weak’ meme via something akin to the invert function in Photoshop.
smintheus
@Knockabout: If these two concern trolls reflect anything, it’s the concern that Obama is likely to beat whatever lousy candidate the Republicans settle upon.
RalfW
This is how we know you someone is right wing f*ktard:
Only Fox-watching morans – and elected GOPs – use that grammatically incorrect construction. Go troll for pie somewhere else.
Brachiator
@Knockabout:
Let’s discuss.
Clinton is not particularly qualified to be president, all the lies that she was commander in chief in training notwithstanding. Monica Lewinsky probably spent more time in the Oval Office with Bill than Hillary.
Clinton is an adequate Secretary of State, but hasn’t done much to build an effective foreign policy organization within State, and depends more on her personal appearance in various hot spots.
The idea that the spouse of a leader (male or female) automatically deserves to be elected ruler is the primitive notion of romance novels and second rate countries.
A Hillary candidacy is nothing more than the feverish fantasy of PUMAs and right wing wise guys.
Amir Khalid
@different-church-lady:
If anything, Obama’s supposed weakness is the entirety of Caddell and Schoen’s argument. Republicans’ intransigence is down to his being too weak to persuade them to do anything, according to Caddell and Schoen, rather than to the Republican strategy of total opposition. That if he campaigns against this intransigence, he is being divisive, the mark of a weak incumbent candidate — rather than being truthful about why Congress isn’t getting anything done, rather than presenting a damn good argument for electing Obama and as many Democrats as possible in 2012.
I think the real purpose of this op-ed piece is to put together the name “Obama” and the adjective “weak”, regardless of justification, as many times as possible within the word limit.
different-church-lady
@Amir Khalid: Exactly. Hillary is just the Trojan Horse they’ve packed their concern trolling into.
Privatize the Profits! Socialize the Costs!
Whenever you hear the words “democrat party” you know that the person who uttered those words has turds for brains.
But hey, turds-for-brains, as long as we are making up funny names for political parties, how do you like this one:
“GOP” = “Greedy One Percenters”?
jayackroyd
But you do expect to see her at the bottom of the ticket don’t you? Swapping chair with Biden.
Suffern ACE
If the only chance your preferred candidate has to win the nomination is for Obama to resign, you do not have a viable candidate for that office. Hillary is not a viable candidate for the Democratic nomination. To obtain that, she needs to enter primaries like other candidates do. If she can’t win those primaries, how does Schoen expect her to win round II?
Regardless, as I stated on this is all silly. Schoen has cast his lot with the group that is looking to recruit a billionaire “no labels” candidate and serves on their board. Hillary, for what it is worth, is not a candidate they would recruit. He is fucking around with the “Only a non-partisan billionaire can save us” group.
Just a guess…they are making about as much headway as Ralph/Michael/Cornell in drafting a ticket.
kay
@Suffern ACE:
That’s why it’s so annoying to me. It sets up this ridiculous idea that his opponent has some moral duty to surrender. I mean, Jesus Christ. Talk about lame. Who would follow these people, anywhere?
“we’re going to yell at you A LOT, you until you give up, and then… we win!”
They’re anti-democratic, but worse, they’re “tough guys” who think they have some God-given right not to compete.
Ivan Ivanovich Renko
And these guys are Democrats?
Amir Khalid
Not altogether off-topic: Bruce Springsteen has announced plans for 2012: a new album (probably not titled Red Dust) and tour with the E Street Band. So far, UK dates have been announced for June and July, including at Sunderland FC and Manchester City. I wonder if Bruce is going to fit in an endorsement of Obama for re-election and a bit of campaigning for him as well.
cat48
@Amir Khalid:
That’s interesting. Bruce played in OH w/the Obama family the weekend before the election last time. Hope we get to see him next yr. again.
cat48
@Amir Khalid:
That’s interesting. Bruce played in OH w/the Obama family at a large rally the weekend before the election last time. Hope we get to see him next yr. again.
Maude
@Amir Khalid:
Bruce Springsteen is from my state, NJ. He is a good guy. I bet he does kick in for Obama. Oh, and using the word risible in a comment? 500 points for you.
gogol's wife
@Amir Khalid:
Is she really leaving? And Corner Stone has left too? Wow.
kay
@Ivan Ivanovich Renko:
Whatever they are, it’s such a stupid thing to suggest. It’s insulting.
Stand DOWN, Mr. Obama, and let us choose your replacement!
In what world does this mean anything? Any sane persons response would be “Fuck you. Make me.” I’m not Obama and that’s what I thought when I read it.
SRW1
@Knockabout:
Dude, (or dudess), when you’re arguments rests on the foundation that the purpose of the op-ed page of the WSJ is to provide valuable strategic advice to the Democratic Party something should strike you as probably being not quite right.
Suffern ACE
@kay: And even were Obama to say “Nuts to this. I’m retiring to Hawaii,” why should we let people like Schoen dictate who the replacement candidate should be. I believe this “Annointing of Hillary by the high hairs” process is what drove a lot of support to Obama last time.
kay
@Ivan Ivanovich Renko: \
I used to have to deal with this sniveling little weasel of an assistant prosecutor. He wouldn’t offer anything, but he was too scared to go to hearing, so he would widen his eyes in fake outrage at my unreasonableness and whine, over and over, “c’mooooon”.
That was all he ever said. I stopped going in with him at all for conference. I’d sit out in the hall. I thought it was insulting. It is insulting.
Nancyboy
@Amir Khalid:
Those are two tough away fixtures to start a tour.
kay
@Suffern ACE:
I believe some of the Clinton “supporters” or “people”, the professionals, not her genuine voters or grass roots supporters, had a very personal, self-serving ambitious agenda that came through loud and clear, and hurt her.
If the Obama people had that, and they may well have, they were smart enough to hide it.
Xenos
@jwest:
Man, Pauline Kael had nothing on these guys. The epistemic closure is so severe they don’t even know that most Americans don’t agree with them, or even like them very much.
If Obama sweeps and retakes the Congress they are going to be acting up in a very serious way.
kay
@Knockabout:
Well, no, because if you or them want to challenge this person it needs to be done seriously, because it’s a serious competition, and he’s a serious opponent and he deserves that respect. Just sort of continually and periodically floating the idea that he should bow out is just offensive, because everyone knows it’s meant to ding him, without actually taking the risk inherent in going up against him. They want to hurt him, but they don’t want to take the risk (losing, pariah status) that goes along with actually challenging him.
It’s cowardly. You can’t beat him with editorials, and nasty shots in newspapers. That isn’t how or where this particular contest is conducted.
kay
@Knockabout:
One would discuss it with Hillary Clinton or “the candidate” and then one would take a risk and announce the results of that discussion. If “the candidate” wanted to challenge Obama, “the candidate” would then do that.
This just isn’t a job you get without sticking your neck way the hell out. They can’t wheel and deal and jab at him from afar by conducting a public dialogue or debate. This isn’t a debate. A primary is a process. It’s an action, and it carries risk.
You know what they get to do with this? If he loses they get to claim they would have won. That’s infuriating to me, because it starts this whole counterfactual cycle again, and keeps them forever in the role of people who “would have, could have” been right. How is he supposed to fight that? It’s wholly imaginary.
Amir Khalid
@Maude:
I pronounce it “wisible”, just like Pontius Pilate did.
AA+ Bonds
Look, it’s a good point, but I have to role my eyes as a liberal once again characterizes liberals as “the bullied kid”.
Y’all really need to get over that. Schoen’s a bitter loser sniping at the class president for being more popular than him and his crew.
AA+ Bonds
@Knockabout:
^ Koch troll spotted
AA+ Bonds
Here’s a hint: anyone who pushes the idea of Hillary Clinton as a 2012 candidate is a Republican. No exceptions.
You’d have to be very ignorant of the left to think that any leftist would prefer Clinton over Obama as President.
Amir Khalid
@gogol’s wife:
Thus spake m_c. If she doesn’t show up here again, then I guess she meant it. On the other hand, she might just want time off to think up a new nym. (If so, I’m half-hoping she settles on Merope Gaunt.)
AA+ Bonds
Timeline:
2007: Rush Limbaugh attempts to ratfuck the election with pro-Hillary rhetoric, fails utterly
2011: Doug Schoen attempts to ratfuck the election with pro-Hillary rhetoric, fails utterly
Honestly, this shows a complete failure on the part of the right wing media. They’re trying a narrative that didn’t succeed, and aren’t changing it one bit to compensate from their previous failure.
They somehow believe that air time for a story translates into an achievement, because they’re extremely poor at evaluating the success and failure of their efforts over the years.
Sometimes I think they don’t even try – it would make sense that right-wing think tanks, like corporate boards, actually despise evaluation and try to keep it from happening, since it reveals when and how they failed the shareholders.
OzoneR
@Knockabout:
yeah turnout is going to be at record levels especially when black voters get told “sorry, your guy has to move over for the white chick, cause he can’t win again despite everything he’s done”
OzoneR
@Knockabout:
Obama, there we discussed it
OzoneR
@Knockabout:
Because nobody wants to run because they support the goddamn President.
why don’t you run?