I hate to put too much stock in Sarah Palin’s Facebook ghostwriters’ musings, but I read a lot of interesting posts today about what they might mean (here; here; here) in terms of the future of the Republican primary.
I’ve believed for a while that Mitt will win, wrap things up pretty early, that the teahadists will grudgingly come around, that Bobo will rediscover Mitt’s Burkean humility, and that we’ll be in for a pretty close race this fall. Let’s say Romney wins the nomination, then loses a fairly close (but not crazy recount close) election this November.
My guess is that we see less ACORN-blaming and more “Romney sucks” from the teahadists. I wonder how much longer the Republican establishment can keep the teahadists from gaining total control of the party.
It’s got to be at least even money that in either this presidential election or the next, the Republican nominee will be raving about Saul Alinsky well into the general election. Will establishment media continue to treat the Republican party as the serious daddy party if this happens or will the clamor for an Americans Elect Bayh-Bloomberg type get even louder?
Don’t forget about Jack Booted UN Black Helicopters.
There’s no bogeyman not close at hand for today’s so called “Conservative”.
Bomb throwing radicals is what they are.
Was “Bloomberb” a typo? Because it really looks like it ought to be a good joke.
Just a typo.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
one of the under reported/commented stories of this cycle, I think, has been Palin’s fade– underreported because her uselessness become too obvious even for Mika Brezcinski to pretend she’s weightier than the feathers in her cranium. A year ago, a few Serious Persons were talking about her as a serious contender for the nomination, now she’s visibly (to my partisan eye) desperate as she flails and wails about the Establishment that picked on her.
I don’t think Romney will talk about Saul Alinsky, but his surrogates will, away from Romney and as much as they can away from cameras. Then again, Romney shared a stage with poor, sad, silly old Jon Voigt, so why not Palin, Joe The notPlumber, so who knows. One interesting thing to watch is what Newt will do. He’s so nutty I think it’s equally possible that he’ll become a Romney booster or continue to troll him to the end. I think he’s more likely to make an indie run than Paul.
Our big media betters have managed to avert their eyes from what the GOP has become for this long, I’m guessing they can continue for some time into the future. What passes for the proles among that crowd take their cues from the millionaire anchorpeople who they all aspire to be some day, and so they’ll continue to remind us that it’s the OWS who need baths and are generally icky, not those nice teahadists in their hoverounds.
I don’t understand why the last para has an either/or choice when the correct answer is in fact “both”.
I’m kind of where you were a few months ago. Obama wins re-elect and the GOP attempts impeachment. They don’t know they’re only 27%. They’re nuts.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: I’m still rooting for the amphibian to make a kamikaze run at Romney once it’s clear who’s getting the Nom.
Well, I won’t predict who will win the GOP nom, though Romney has all the usual advantages with money, and support from the party elite. But I wouldn’t count NEwtster out completely. I doubt Romney wins Florida by a landslide, and when Santorum bows out, his votes would mostly go to Newt, I think.
My sense is when it comes to the control that comes with voting power in a primary, the tea hadists do control things. Right now, the two competing memes in the lizard brain, are first, the notion that Romney can more likely beat Obama in the general election, but that notion has been slipping, the more we learn about Romney.
The other competing notion is the gravitational pull of tribal purity. Right now, the former is likely keeping enough of them supporting Romney, but they don’t trust him, nor think he is one of them. Tribal purity is a powerful thing, so who knows?. I tend to go with that as winning the day in the end. If Newt can stay somewhat close to Mitt in the short run.
I’ll dissent, and copypasta my post from another thread:
The likely course of events will be: Romney wins the nomination, then tacks to the center, HARD, on economic issues, big populist stuff, OWS levels. The 1% will not believe it and will know that Romney is a capitalist douche in his heart and being a cynical pol, so this won’t cost him anything in the election. Compassionate Conservatism V2.0 from The Bishop.
The base will briefly wake up from their stupor and realize a) they’re actually poor fucks that are struggling and could use some help b) the other guy is black. (after the election point ‘a’ will be wiped from their minds.)
Independents will realize a) The middle class is currently doomed and they could use some help, and b) the other guy is saying the same thing, but he’s black. No work will be required to have the I’s forget what they just learned one week ago.
He might win with this. He will certainly make it very close. I still wage money on Obama, but it will actually not be a cakewalk unless Romney really blows it.
post election the R’s will not think Romeny failed for failing conservatism. They will realize that populist economic justice rhetoric from an R can take a hopeless campaign and make it a real race. They don’t even have to actually enact ANYTHING they promise. The bubble will have them think something else. They can vote in any tax cut they like, remove any regulation, take Wall Street contributions, business as usual. Nobody will call them on this, and those that do won’t be invited in Fox or CNN or given candidate access. It is campaign style from a previous century in the south and it can be brought back.
It is the only sane path for them, given demographic and polling trends.
Newt’s already shown you can co-opt OWS rhetoric for your own needs, and do it better.
you heard it here first.
Odie Hugh Manatee
While I believe Mitt will win the primary, I am hoping beyond hope that the Noot pulls it off. Nothing will turn off more people in this country than that asshole being selected by any serious political party as a contender for President, let alone one that is supposed to be the Party of American Morality.
It came to my mind that there have been no satiric comedy campaigns getting started. That gag is way old, ever since mass media. I think I read that Charlie McCarthy and his sidekick Edgar Bergen ran a long time ago.
But maybe the GOP primary field has sucked up all the oxygen, since that is nothing but black humor.
Yeah, I’ve also been wondering what happens in this scenario. The Teabaggers will froth and rage, convinced that they just lost to Obama twice because of moderate nominees. I saw a poll the other day that showed Gingrich supporters believe he’s the most electable in the general. Imagine that! So in the event Romney loses to Obama I’d expect the 27 percenters to rally hard and get their wish in 2016.
Then there’s Ron Paul. He ain’t young. Where do his supporters go in, say, 4 or 8 years or whenever he’s done with running for President? Does Rand inherit the family business or can they be wooed by a third party Libertarian? He’s got a serious base of support up for grabs. I can’t imagine they’ll put up with being treated like shit by their own party forever. Or maybe they’ll just fall in line like good little Republicans and the whole Ron Paul thing will just fade away.
@jl: Doesn’t Colbert’s satirical Super PAC campaign count ?
Yeah, right: Grover The Infallible Political Prophet Norquist predicts impeachment of a recently-reelected President Obama over tax issues? Jeez, even Newt The Zoot – as Speaker Of The Goddamn House and self-appointed Inquisitor-general, with a big (if lame-duck) majority had to strain push an impeachment through for way more serious shit on Bill Clinton (which public disgust led to its ignominious FAIL in the Senate). And Grover thinks this crap will work on Obama just WHY?
The major question shouldn’t be whether this hallucinatory crapola is “doable” or not, but really: why any media outlet is giving Norquist’s fevered fantasies the time of day in the first place…
Please oh please! I’m rooting for a schism on the Right. A rowdy one, please. With lots of black eyes and bloody noses.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I agree. Third party Newt.
And Fourth party Paul???
Pass the popcorn
Colbert himself was running for President of South Carolina, but he dropped out.
But you might have a point. Moneys are the real candidates. And Colbert is the comedic genius to first understand that.
In the future there will be no satiric runs for president by celebrities anymore, there will be satiric Super PACs.
If Romney gets the nomination and loses the election, it’ll be blamed on the GOP not going hard enough right.
If Gingrich gets the nomination and loses the election, it’ll be blamed on the GOP not going hard enough right.
Either way, the crazy will get ramped up to levels that normal people will not believe; which the media will declare the new Middle Ground; and which the right will decide is too RINO and push even farther right.
At some point, the right will become convinced that it’s time to finally start the revolution and take it too far, only realizing just how badly they’ve misjudged the rest of the country and how badly they’ve just fucked up when a building has been blown up or a politician has been shot at. The ones who can scurry back into the cobwebbed corners will be allowed to hunker down for another decade or two — several of the ones who weren’t fast enough will go to prison.
Nothing will happen to Limbaugh, no matter how hard he was cheerleading for blown-up buildings or shot-at politicos.
Yes. They’ll just move the goalposts. It’s what the always do.
Even if Newt Gingrich is the nominee and dresses up as Moussolini, pounds his fist on the podium, screaming for the public hanging of all Democrats, David Gregory and Wolf Blitzer would still maintain that Republicans are serious, and that Democrats are exactly the same (though 2/3 of the Sunday show guests would still be R’s).
I dunno: therewere Donald Trump and Herman Cain in the race; the main problem was that they weren’t actually “satirical”; comedic though they turned out to be.
I just KNEW I threw this out there two threads too early…edited/added to for clarity
You’re right. Norquist is pretty fringe. Good thing the only people that take him absolutely seriously are Republican Legislators.
You’re far more optimistic than I. The right will never admit they’ve gone too far and having Democrats shot isn’t going to convince them as much as it will egg them on.
I still think the GOP lesson is more complicated.
If Mitt leans hard center, and loses bad, then yes, the 27% will take over completely and pick the next presidential candidate.
If Mitt leans hard center, or even left, and makes it close….. I think my statement above holds.
I think close is the most likely outcome. Mitt can reclaim the base with abortion and racist dog whistles, and independents with economic populism, all without risking his wealthy buddies who know he’s lying about everything (except to them).
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
Because that’s been the way the Tea partiers have worked all these years.
See in the intertubes that the CA GOP chairman is going to cry a river in an interview show tomorrow morning about his dying party (dying at least in this state).
The GOP funded petition drive to overturn the nonpartisan citizen panel districts failed in court, so the new districts will be in force while the GOP drive to destroy them rolls on.
As I understand it, the GOP said that because they have enough or will have enough signatures to qualify, a referendum to overturn the new districts, that was grounds for using the old districts.
Interesting fact I did not know, or that I forgot to savor long enough before forgetting it: Number of CA statewide GOP office holders is zero. I like that stat.
Looks like the nonpartisan commission really did clean up some of the rotten GOP boroughs in CA. And I think only 1 seat in one state leg house and 2 in other to drive GOP below 1/3 and into complete irrelevance in state government.
That cheers me up. A lousy GOP candidate from a fractured GOP would do wonders for CA.
I’m wondering if Mitt’s upcoming Burkeian humility is going to be appropriately leavened by Oakshottian skepticism.
I heard recently that Bill Maher recently asked, “Who the fuck is Saul Alinsky?” I know Alinski’s been dead for 40 years but he was already well known in progressive circles long before Teabaggers and Republicunts began dredging his body up to kick it to the curb. Alinski was only the father of latter day community organizing and not the polite kind practiced by Obama in Chicago. Alinski was not above using Fart Ins to get his point across. Just 2 weeks before he died of a heart attack, someone once asked him about the afterlife and said he hoped he went to Hell. When the Playboy interviewer asked him why, he said the Have Nots would need a champion and that they were his kind of people. Sounds like my kind of guy.
Btw, today’s my 7th anniversary as a blogger. Here are my thoughts on the phenomenon of blogging and its efficacy or lack thereof. Please donate whatever you can. The wolves are getting awfully loud outside our windows.
Damn straight. I remember after election day 2006 when EVERY SINGLE wingnut on talk radio was saying “Democrats didn’t win, conservatives didn’t lose!” They refused to self-identify as members of the Republican party they had just spent all year supporting or admit that the more liberal of the two parties had defeated the conservative one. Totally delusional.
Solution: run further to the right. Result: President Barack Obama.
pseudonymous in nc
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
I assume he’s going to run hard on the “turning the US into Europe” line, in the hope that the Germans steer the rest of the Eurozone into a ditch over the course of the year. Now, the liberal response to that is “universal healthcare, employee protection, ample paid holidays, generous paternal leave? Really, that’s so fucking terrible?” but Obama can’t really run on that, for annoying reasons.
So I think he’ll pick at the Gingrich buffet w/r/t “Obama is not one of us”, but not gorge himself on the more obvious appeals to race.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
One wingnut I know was so elated about Palin in 2008 that he guaranteed McCain would win in a landslide. He was still seeing the starbursts when Palin quit, constantly claiming that she wasn’t quitting, but rather was “outmaneuvering liberals.” He repeatedly claimed that all conservatives had a chivalrous duty to defend her against that mean ol’ media.
Then, yesterday, he said this:
Oh, how the mighty have fallen.
@Jay C: That is true. And they were doing it for publicity, most probably.
But Zounds! I cannot find any histories of comedian and celebrity political campaigns in the US. OMG!
I think we had them as soon as we had a mass media. As soon as newspapers with national circulation, and then of course, with movies and radio.
Does anyone know of a history of satirical and celebrity US Presidential campaigns?
@MikeJ: I’m just going from memory of the period after OKC when the revelation that McVeigh was a militia man caused most of the previously dick-swinging militias to announce that they weren’t one of *those* militias and disband…
@pseudonymous in nc:
Well we know the Germans are mit Romney.
Davis X. Machina
@freelancer: Control of both Houses guarantees at least a trial…
I just don’t see it. If Romney gets crushed, then they’ll scream about the impurity of the candidate and lack of fealty to the one true faith (conservatism).
but he’s not going to get crushed. He is going to better than the polls have him at this point. This is the end of the tea party and the start of a much more cynical GOP.
Newt showed them the way. You can be GOP and populist (at least while campaigning).
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
Come to Texas, where the stat is completely reversed.
@Scott: There are a lot people on the right who still claim McVeigh wasn’t a militia guy, he was actually Iraqi intelligence.
So, who are the Dem candidates in 2016 ?
Davis X. Machina
@moops: Clinton/Kucinich. Or even better, Kucinich/Clinton.
Finally real progressives get their day in the sun. No more lesser-of-two-evils.
No, we need two in the Senate and four in the Assembley to get to the 2/3 mark. I am working on a campaign in the 38th Assembley Distict (Santa Clarita and Simi Valleys and North San Fernando Valley). This is a pretty safe R district, with a six point Republican registration edge. But the two main Republican candidates are Buck McKeon’s former Chief of Staff and Buck McKeon’s wife (who is 69 and has never run for office). These two are going to blows in the primary. Our guy, Ed Headington, is a moderate Dem who should make the final cut and then go head to head with the Republican survivor. Our chances our slim to slim, but I think we have a shot, and we are already out hitting the bricks five months before the primary.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@moops: I’ll play: Evan Bayh, Sherrod Brown, Claire McCaskill, John Hickenlooper, Harold Ford. Just for fun, the governor of Maryland, O’Malley?
Do we believe Hillary when she says she’s retiring? I’ve never been sure about the fire in her belly.
@Davis X. Machina: I think Clinton is retired. Cuomo will probably run. I used to think Bev Perdue would be picked to be a VP candidate, but now I’m not so certain.
I still can’t fathom the GOP picking a debatopalooza primary. GOP candidates all suck at debates, and people good at GOP primary debates suck in presidential debates where you can’t “get the crowd on your side”.
It is this fact that gives me hope. That they are so oblivious and lacking in self-awareness. They think Newt would wreck Obama in a debate.
how the flip did I end up in flippin’ mod hell?
@feebog: Thanks for correction. Four in Assembly? Aww hector.
I worked for Buchanan, that was a pick up a few years ago.
I was JUST thinking about this!
For a while now, I’ve been on the ‘GOP is basically a dead man walking’ boat. But, the Palin and Cain endorsements — their timing, when Newt’s already lost — made me look at it differently. All they — Cain, Palin, Erickson, the non establishment grifters — want is a pot of money to suck on. If Romney looked like he had a chance, they’d be HUGE supporters. Since it looks like he won’t, they know they won’t get the cash from a triumphant GOPer in the WH (a la GWBs giving out great lashings of influence to peddle) so they need to set up a cash flow for the wilderness period. Voila, bash Mitt, blame the loss on moderation, promise their voters that if we just push a little more (and buy up those CPAC tickets and all the rest of trash they hawk — those books won’t buy themselves), NEXT TIME a fantastic candidate that has all the qualities of anger, divisiveness, outsideryness and the ability to pull off silly stunts will be salvation.
All that by way of saying, once they have a candidate, any candidate, that looks like they can win, regardless of policies, this rift will be magically healed. Sure, they’ll carp for appearances sake but none of them will pass up a real chance at that delicious executive branch money. Till then, they fight over the diminishing scraps and act like there is some massive grassroots voter block that they control. They don’t want to govern. Unelectability = feature, not bug for your average TP grifter.
with all the car-wreck gazing we have been doing it has been a wasted opportunity to start working on a real progressive successor to Obama in 2016.
Moops, I think that after the coming November win by Obama, the GOP race will be on to find someone who speaks (however disingenuously) to all three ‘legs’ of the party, much like W did. Not that it will do them much good but at least they will try.
I’m interested to see how they square the need for more Hispanic voters with their Tea Party/nativist base…that should get quite creative! Invest in popcorn futures…=)
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Um, Cuomo and Gillibrand in some form/fashion?
Clinton won’t run. She would have been far more visible already if she even had any inkling of running. She is invited to every Sunday talk show, and hasn’t bothered since October. I think she likes her current job. She can do it for a lot more years, maybe even get great at it.
Fucen Pneumatic Fuck Wrench Tarmal
if it weren’t for scotus, you could almost game it out that the gop might be better off building momentum for a sweep in 14 and a run at what they like to do with the white house in 16.
if you imagine an electable republican, suppose they win in 12? what can they really do baring an economic miracle that would obviously not be coming from shrewd policy? their game works when the economy is going to grow regardless.
Let’s try this again without setting off the tripwire:
Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Al Franken, Martin O’Malley, Bernie Sanders, Jim Webb, and the media saavy, meritocratic offspring of the Clintons and the Russerts.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@Jeffro: I guess if Cuomo gets married, we can take that as a sign of things to come
The Tea Party was plenty populist, what with their “I want my country back” cries and whatnot. And the Tea Party candidates played right into that in 2010. Newt’s not exactly inventing the wheel.
As for a cynical GOP, the money boys in the party have always been cynical. They need the rubes to vote for them, though. Whatever act they have to put on to sell it to the rubes, that’s what they’ll do. Right now populism is popular, so they’ll try that. In two or four years time it might be something else. Whatever works.
Mitt Romney, born-again populist? The $250 million dollar man? The vulture capitalist, the guy who fired you, Mr. “Corporations are people too, my friend?” Mitt’s going to make it close by fooling everyone into thinking he’s a populist? The American people have bought some pretty stupid shit over the years, but I’m going to go ahead and say they aren’t quite that stupid.
The prophet Nostradumbass
For future Dem candidates, how about Cory Booker, mayor of Newark NJ? I expect him to start moving up the rungs at some point.
I think if your main concern is social issues, that would be a pretty good ticket, but in terms of reining in Wall Street and other corporate power abusers, I’m not so sure. My personal dream candidates are Sherrod Brown or Russ Feingold, maybe Schweitzer as veep.
Still no luck in finding a history of satirical and celebrity presidential campaigns. There’s gotta be something, right?
Found this, which seems (Edit, is) weird. I did not know there was a thing called vice presidential comedy.
Vice‐presidential comedy and the traditional female role: An examination of the rhetorical characteristics of the vice presidency
Western Journal of Communication
Okay one of names of one of the candidates I suggested sets off the moderation filter.
I’ll list them by referencing their titles:
The Mayor of Newark
Current Dem Candidate for Massachusetts Jr Senate Seat
Jr Senator from Minnesota
Governor of Maryland
Jr Senator from Vermont
Sr Senator from Virginia
certainly that is their plan, that explains their strategy, but I don’t think they will prevail, because another class of grifter is going to emerge.
I think we are going to see New Age Republican pundits and hacks. Libertarian isolationists from the dead Paul branch, merging with racists (you can still lock up the Hispanic vote while bashing the lazy and criminal blacks and illegal hispanics), with economic populists that bash Wall Street and vulture capitalists (without actually proposing to change any regulations).
Clinton said she’s retiring from her current Sec of State job at the end of Obama’s term, even if he’s elected again.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: First Lady Sandra Lee? I don’t think so.
@moops: She does like her current job. But she announced last week that she will leave it in 2013 regardless of who wins the election. I don’t think she will run in 2016.
people have little clue how viciously anti-illegal-immigrant legal immigrants can be…and how racist they are in general. You also have this bonus from legal immigrants from the other top 10 immigrant countries.
most Mexican and Central American and Canadian and Asian immigrants are up for grabs. It is working in Florida.
Who exactly is (behind) American Select anyway?
@freelancer: I know the last one is probably snark, but please don’t tell me that Chelsea will be old enough to run in 2016. I don’t wanna look. I’d have to start doing that “where did time go” middle aged existential crap again.
@Chris T.: My guess is that Mark Penn and David Schoen figured no one would hire them for serious campaign money again and found a few billionaires disgruntled enough with the President and dumb as rocks about politics to grift a few million dollars to promote alternatives.
As noted, how can Romney possibly pull a pivot to an economic populist general campaign. $10,000 bets, and vulture capitalism and all that……
there are ways.
He is already spouting “I feel your pain” bullcrap. He just needs better advertising. Few people watch Bill Maher laugh this crap into pulp. If Rush tells them this is important… I admit, my hypothetical pivot seems impossible today, but it is there for the Dems to screw up.
actually, Rush is the wildcard here. He wants the same grift as Sarah and the rest. So, bagging on Romney is the obvious strategy. Weather the Dem presidency as the victim and pour the bile out.
Who are you talking about? How racist who is “in general”?
What do you mean “up for grabs”? Can’t speak for Canadians, but as far as Latinos, they’ve been moving Dem for the last few years. The spate of anti-immigrant laws in various states haven’t helped. You might be a legal immigrant, or even a Latino whose family has been American before the Mayflower arrived, but with these new laws like in AZ and AL, your very legitimacy to stay in the US is questioned. That kind of thing will turn people against the GOP right quick like.
@moops: Oh, I agree as far as the elastic nature of the supposed principles. If they’ve shown anything, they’ve shown that they will adopt whatever policy looks like it has cash behind it. My main and very garbled point was that they’ll kick up a lot of dust and make a lot of noise but, in the future, if there is a candidate who can win as a GOPer, the crazies will fall right the hell in line, no matter how moderate that person is. I don’t think they want an actual TP or anti establishment candidate to actually win or be the nominee.
Rand Paul, trying to take over the Paulites, is a good example. No non-interventionist will win as a GOPer. He can draw off that for his whole career without the troublesome running a real campaign and actually governing getting the way. And he already has one stunt under his belt!
@moops: Well, he could talk about how he suckered wall street bankers into lending him money and drank their milkshakes when the deals went bad.
I think it’s kinda weird that many of you don’t see that that Teahadis already completely dominate the GOP. Some of you keep saying, “how long until..?” and the answer is it’s already done. They dominate everything – every single thing – that Boehner and McConnel do, and they do it stupidly and with proud ignorance. Just because the national party people in DC and their media lackeys are desperately pushing Romney right now does not mean that they are in control of this shit. Romney is already so fucking far to the right on every single issue. He’s already attacking Obama using Teahadi frames. And Obama, especially after this week’s SOTU, completely fucking owns the middle (thank god!).
It’s already done. The lunatics run the asylum. You’re completely kidding yourself if you think Romney can pull off tacking hard to the middle. The Teahadis will stay home and Obama already owns every piece of real estate to the left of Reagan, and some to the right, as well.
I will be shocked if Romney is the nominee and at least one big-name conservative doesn’t mount an indie bid, just to maintain purity. These assholes cannot stop themselves, because they won’t be buying Romney.
If they lose this election, won’t the Republicans push even further to the right? Not sure how much further they can go, but won’t this spur another round of “Mitt wasn’t conservative enough, that’s why we lost” craziness, and another purging of moderates?
I keep waiting for the other shoe to drop on this Saul Alinsky thing. Dick Armey was handing out Rules for Radicals to the Tea Party leadership. At some point someone is going to report on the favorable connection between Saul Alinsky and the Tea Party.
sorry, I can’t imagine any of them being viable unless they are given a big national platform now.
unfortunately only Kucinich seems functional from the 2008 cycle, and I don’t think he can do it.
How do we give a platform to some viable contenders and get them some air time ?
@moops: Obama gave a huge widely lauded speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. Four years later he was President. There is an eternity of political time between now and 2016. Chillax dude.
Saul Alinskty, Satanist (didn know that didja?)
from Playboy interview
ALINSKY: Hell would be heaven for me. All my life I’ve been with the have-nots. Over here, if you’re a have-not, you’re short of dough. If you’re a have-not in hell, you’re short of virtue. Once I get into hell, I’ll start organizing the have-nots over there.
PLAYBOY: Why them?
ALINSKY: They’re my kind of people.
@jl: Actually, I think it’s kind of good that he’s in Hell giving the devil a hard time. My guess is that they probably get 15 minutes off from torment each hour and the temperature has been lowered by 10 degrees.
She’s 31 right now. She’ll be eligible by 2016. And yes it was snark.
I mentioned wee Dennis in one of the comments that’s still under mod, but I think he’d jump in just because that’s what he does. Also, What Yutsy said. Obama came from an unprecedented position and by 2016, there’s a lot of time for a candidate to come from what the mainstream voter would consider “obscurity” and make a name for themselves.
what happens next?
well the folks on the right can’t possibly see themselves as being in the wrong or not being in the majority, despite what the voters say because that will be what Faux News will tell them.
So we’ll see more distortions, more obstructionism and then even more overreach at the state and local level in the name of our values and the baby jeebus in the hopes of restoring the balance of power that existed in 1870.
More people will have to die needlessly until the cameras catch some whacked out biscuit shooting people in the name of Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh or committing some heinous act in the name of Caribou Barbie in hopes of “taking our country back” by burning mosques or shooting brown people at the border. Even then, that will be spun as they deserved it for the crime of not being white.
And while all that shiny is going on, if the happy friendly remnants of the US see fit to restore Dems to both houses, we still have to depend on way too many asshats in the Senate to get enough meaningful change to help people soon enough before the next Republican adonis steps onto the stage with more folksy wisdom and slick lies. Hopefully by then I may even have a job or a book deal.
John - A Motley Moose
@jl: Monty Paulsen is apparently carrying on his father’s tradition of running for president.
@Davis X. Machina: you’re a puss.
The obvious 2016 ticket is Grayson/Cenk!
Speaking of up and coming contenders, check out Julian Castro, current mayor of San Antonio. Here’s a NYT profile on him. Stanford grad, Harvard Law. Young (37 years old), charismatic, great smile. Even has a twin brother Joaquin who’s running for Charlie Gonzales’s seat.
Julian has already met the President and is being “auditioned” for more significant roles. I hope he gets a spot at the convention, just like Obama did in 2004.
There’s an upside to this. The proportion of American voters who actually know who Saul Alinsky was will go from 1 in 10 to 1 in 5. Of course, most of those who don’t know of him and are curious enough to look him up will conclude that he was clearly a Commie rat bastard or something. But hey, they might even learn his most famous line: “Don’t worry, boys, we’ll weather this storm of approval and come out as hated as ever.”
well, the 2012 coronation for Obama might be a good platform to put a progressive contender on the national stage.
@David Koch: Well, if we’re gonna go out there, how about an Lady de Rothschild/Arianna Huffington unity ticket.
I just think more has to be done to create a viable candidate field for 2016. The left doesn’t want to be looking at the crapfest that the right is looking at now. They had lots of time to groom contenders, and blew it.
Read the profile of Julian Castro I linked above. They’re already looking for people. He’s a good example.
perhaps a blogger for 2020 ? ;-)
East Indian, Vietnamese…maybe? But Chinese, Japanese, Filipino and Korean? With a lot of the China scare mingering coming from Republicans? And most of the elected Asian American officials being Dems? I don’t think you’re as familiar with this territory as yo think you are?
I can’t see a mayor jumping into a 2016 candidacy. Dems like Congress, Senate, or Governors or State Senators at least.
Castro is a much longer game. He’s not even 40 yet.
Well, have family that are GOPer Canadian immigrants, they loathe illegals.
Have heard similar from Hispanic and Asian legals.
I’m sure there are people working on just that, under the radar. But given the not-always-unjustified paranoia about being seen as “disloyal”, concentrating on President Obama’s re-election is a better idea right now. If nothing else, any hint of “taking our eyes off the ball” will be used by the Rethug ratfvckers as evidence that we don’t really want That Man in the White House to keep his job. Rest assured that on November 7th, the exploratory committees for 2016 will be announced… and the seating arrangements for President Obama’s second inaugural will be scrutinized!
You’re right. Changing positions is not possible for Romney; he already has a reputation as a flip flopper. Besides, traditionally candidates move to the middle in the general, by de-emphasizing the harder right or left planks in the party platform. Traditionally, most candidates who won their party’s nomination were not on the far right or left of the party in the first place. They tend to move to the middle rhetorically, but they don’t have to disavow what they said in the primaries. Romney is on record proudly embracing hard right positions.and he’s not going to be able to claim he didn’t say those provocative things. He’s tried that with the mandate stuff and it isn’t working.
@Martin: George Romney consulted with Saul Alinsky while governor of MI after the Detroit riots. I don’t think Mitt will have much Saul Alinsky bashing success.
@Suffern ACE: Wiener/Spitzer ’16 — the only true progressives!
Both Sebelius and Napolitano out of the cabinet could run with both federal executive and gubernatorial experience. There’s going to be replacements for Clinton and Geithner, which are both places to groom potential runners. There’s this years governors races to identify candidates.
If Obama proved anything, it was that a strong candidate doesn’t need a lifetime in government to run and win. At this point in the 2008 race, almost nobody knew who Obama even was – he was still a state Senator. And if Obama proved anything else, it was that a strong candidate can overcome any conventional wisdom liability – so I don’t think the Dems will hold back encouraging women to run in 2016. I wouldn’t be surprised if the majority of leading candidates were women – there’s quite a few good candidates to choose from.
Sorry, you have no credibility.
I was expecting some facts and figures. We KNOW that most elected Asian Americans are Democratic. We KNOW that younger Asian Americans identify Dem over Republican and independent combined. We KNOW that Asian Americans went for Obama 63 to 36 percent.
I don’t think you KNOW much at all. How about a little more hard fact and a lot less concern trolling?
Just watched The Thomas Crown Affair on Public TV. The 1968 one. Great movie. What did I miss?
Hmmm… moops has been here before, with “concerns.” Je pense que moops est un “concern troll.”
@Omnes Omnibus: A new commenter named moops making an ass of him/herself.
@Omnes Omnibus: If he knew what he was talking about, it might be worth something. But he was trying to pass himself as knowing something about an area I know a little about (long timers know that I’m Asian American and a former Dem precinct officer).
Hm. It sounds very similar to a lot of pundit journalists….
@Gwangung: Eek! You’re not white? One is ever so shocked and appalled.
@Omnes Omnibus: Oh, you know is Asians are tame minorities….very harmless…..
@Omnes Omnibus: D’accord, mon ami.
@Gwangung: It’s really funny, because moops hasn’t really presented any sort of facts yet. Just his feeling. He just KNOWS it!
@Gwangung: But still… Do black and gay people comment here too?
Christ, this act is hard to sustain. The “moops” creature is an obvious dipshit – whether spoof or real.
@Gwangung: Yeah. I remember Pat Buchanan going on about how all Chinese have taken loyalty oaths to the PRC and are just as dangerous as the Mexican government sponsored reconquest back in the mid 1990s. That would tend to make groups feel a bit unwanted, trying to restart the “yellow peril” and all.
@Yutsano: Well, seriously, a lot of us are like that…presenting our observations of the politics, based on our vantage point. And…sometimes they might be prescient.
Of course it helps if you aren’t just pulling things out of your ass about a community you know nothing about…might help your arguments on ther matters….
@Gwangung: An observation is not the same thing as a vague feeling. An observation is taking in the information presented and formulating a conclusion. So far I have no idea where moops comes to the conclusions he does. And that just makes me go huh?
OO, I know this is going to come as something of a shock, but I have something to tell you…
@Omnes Omnibus: I’m a white boy. Sorry I never told you before. :)
concern trolling means something different. concern trolling is, by definition, insincere and fabricated and meant to derail productive discussion.
What is unproductive about this ? what is insincere about this?
I don’t troll. I have no stomach for it. Your position is that past polling puts recent immigrants in the Dem’s pocket. is that correct ?
I’ve taken the usual ad hominem on BJ for years. I have the honor of being referred to with ironic quotes around my handle. Non-person. creature.
well, gay people often get to comment on gay community sentiment without statistics on hand.
I don’t get to comment as a recent legal immigrant ?
quoted commentator walking.
@Yutsano: Wow, I has assumed that you were an Afro-Asian trans-person.
I guess this will teach me to make assumptions.
@Suffern ACE: Well, worse than that, but Asian Americans were REALLY fucked over by immigration law until the mid 60/….the quota for Chinese until then was 250. That’s in the fund reds. I had cousins who got put on immigration lists when they were born…and they didn’t get here until ey were adults….and let’s not talk about the internment camps and th Asian Exclusion Acts….
The burnt child fears the fire…..
@moops: Boo hoo.
Bring something to the table. Don’t pull crap out of your ass.
Take it like an adult and don’t pull any passive aggressive poor me crap—you need to work a whole lot harder now to re establish that credibility you squandered.
@moops: You may comment as you see fit. The flip side is that people will interpret your comments based on 1) the value of the comment on its merits, 2)the reputation of the commenter on this site, 3) whether people think one is a troll.
It isn’t easy for any nationality to legally immigrate, and neither party has a start next to their name on this issue.
My admittedly anecdotal experience is that the Republicans are in the process of losing the Chinese vote. A lot of my coworkers are Chinese immigrants, and I’ve always thought of them as being right leaning. But they’re getting freaked out by the crazy, and starting to realize that the whole party is in thrall to it.
I was very surprised when one Chinese coworker, who I thought of as pretty far to the right, started to notice how crazy the Tea Party is when they gamed Dancing With The Stars. I mentioned that she should be careful about calling them teabaggers because it’s also a rude sexual term, and it just made her more inclined to call them that, with obvious glee that she was getting away with using a nasty name for them. I get the feeling that once people open their eyes to how crazy the 27%ers are, they get turned off the Republican Party pretty quickly.
@moops: Keep pulling stuff out of your ass.
You are aware that you are defining an ad hominem rebuttal, right ?
I don’t exactly have a few hundred comments on BJ from which you can generate a reliable point to refute me based on “the reputation of the commenter on this site” ?
I’m not the General, or BO_Bill that have several hundred comments to work on. You know almost nothing about me to form an opinion of “the commenter”
I’m actually curious about this process now.
@freelancer: We should be so lucky. Trying to impeach two democratic presidents in a row would hurt the GOP’s public image so hard, and even further cement the Dems as the adults in the room.
@moops: Well first of all you’re attributing comment to gwangung that he didn’t make. That’s an error right there.
You’re also not showing us any actual evidence for your assertions. Since you are not a frequent commenter by your own admission, we need you to establish some form of credibility. So far you have not done this.
Shorter me: “Who are you, and why should I care?”
@moops: You aren’t doing well. Much of your commentary was aimed at me, yet you addressed it at someone else. One would think you would be more careful. Apparently, one would be wrong. Oh, well. One shall deal.
I didn’t do that. I quoted the material from the person I was replying to. the additional comment was for @Omnes Omnibus
I did admit I don’t have polling data to back my account.
I expect a similar attack on Roger Moore now for his anecdote. Get to it.
OTOH, all the previous anti-Asian rules mean that a lot of Asian Americans are more recent immigrants who don’t have personal memories or family stories of the bad old days. That certainly seems to be the case in my area (San Gabriel Valley), where most of the Asian Americans are first and second generation immigrants.
My impression from the admittedly limited cross section I interact with (mostly coworkers) is that the first generation immigrants have mostly leaned right, but that this is changing. The older Vietnamese are still pretty right wing because of the war, but the Chinese I know are starting to notice and be scared by the Republican crazy. Also they seem to think our health care situation is terrible compared to what they’re used to back in China(!) and seem to appreciate that the Democrats are trying to do something to fix it. I don’t know that they’re solidly in the Democrats’ camp the way some other minorities are, but they definitely seem to have been moving left recently.
fine, I’ll directly quote ever person, by name, in their own comment, while defending myself. So as to assure perfect recording accuracy :-)
@Omnes Omnibus: I was worried that my bubble would finally be burst and Yutsano would turn out to be a worker at the Highway Transportation Safety Administration.
@moops: Please expand upon what you meant to say to me.
@moops: RM has cashed a check or two here, you haven’t…. sorry but we have no choice but to enforce the heinous commenter ID laws placed upon us from right wing blogs like Red State… (geez RM, who ever woulda thunk it would be me having your back?)
The non-person kind of response that puts my handle in quotes.
@Suffern ACE: I am an ebil gubmint worker though. That still counts amirite?
(although where in the government may be changing soon.)
@moops: Protip: that’s blogging etiquette. We’re not just being dickheads by pointing that out.
@moops: The fuck?
@Yutsano: You are a unicorn wrangler, right?
Absolutely, candidates matter. Here’s the deal. During the primary season a significant number of voters from both parties like to claim they are supporting one candidate over another for ideological or policy reasons, when, in fact, they are simply supporting the candidate they like the best for a variety of reasons. Ron Paul aside, all the Republican candidates have been consistently hard right both ideologically and rhetorically. The tea party types are tying themselves in knots trying to argue that Newt is the true conservative when his record belies that. The simple truth is they just like him better. Frankly, I don’t think there is anything wrong with that. In 08 I decided to support Obama over Clinton and Edwards because I liked him better and thought he was the best campaigner and candidate of the three. In the Democratic primary, I’m not picking the best health care plan, immigration plan or education plan. Congress isn’t going to rubber-stamp those plans anyway. In a primary I’m picking the best candidate, and that doesn’t make me a low information voter.
@Yutsano: Yeah, but that job you have gives you a badass cachet in a manner that thinking about ways to bevel roads simply doesn’t. No offense to civil engineers.
I don’t comment often (maybe one thread a week has a topic I resonate with) but I have read and commented here for four years. I had a similar experience a year ago at Hullabaloo, which I’ve been a commentator at for 6 years pretty regularly. It was odd having it happen from three commentators that had only shown up in that same year. BJ is a larger group, so I assume everyone taking a turn here are decade members to be on the safe side.
I did get to watch the firebagger purge and thought the cliche process strange. I didn’t care for their comments so didn’t participate. Should I present more references to establish my regular status ? The ABL dramatics ?
For the record, it’s Moors! /bubbleboy
And FWIW, it’s possible he may be concern trolling to try and change the subject, but the questions he brings ARE in fact interesting and material to ideas being discussed by this blog and other centrists/left-wing political participants. If he’s ratfucking, Fuck him! As far as 2016 is concerned, we’ll address that concern on November 7th of this year. Til then, it’s #TeamFuckYeah or bust.
“And as my friend Jimmy Pineapple likes to say ‘Case Fucking Closed!'” -Bill Hicks, 1989
that The Fuck
quotes, creature, the whole pathetic ad hominem non-person crap. Being a pseudo-citizen for a decade makes a person sensitive to second-class status.
@moops:Dude/Dudette, WTF are you trying to say? Try straightforward English, we will likely understand. If you have a point, we will understand.
several hundred? Shit, those two have to be in the tens of thousands by now. They have several hundred posts a week.
@Omnes Omnibus: or if you build it, we’ll check and see if it violates building codes… or something like that….
gotta tell ya OO, after last night’s navel gazing I feel a lot better today, but then again I caught another rendition of the Pillows’ Ride on Shooting Star and that always perks me up.
I’m not sure how you are not getting this.
I will back up and making things even more explicit.
The grammatical use of quotations is to refer to something as existing in only an ironic sense. Or to refer to a literal quotation, like this. You refer to me as a “creature” explicitly.
I don’t think the English can get any clearer.
what is still confusing ?
I’m not taking his side, but lemme just say leave it be. He can always fax in his credenzas to establish credibility. :)
yeah, that makes my point. They show up all the time. It is reasonable to form an opinion based on the reputation of those commentators.
@moops: Well, the entire quote to which I referred was a bit of a word salad, wasn’t it?
@freelancer: That is true. And it would be inappropriate for me to say that it was not true.
so, anecdotes are OK from a real regulars, but not from occasional posters ?
I just started with
given the crapfest the GOPers are working with it would be nice to figure out who could be a viable 2016 candidate.
Then it went back to an earlier discussion of Romney/Obama being closer than most people expect.
Interesting and material yes. Currently relevant? No. It may be a personal flaw, but I’d rather focus on the more immediate concerns of keeping a Democrat in the White House, keeping the Senate (the toughest challenge), and taking back the House than worrying about the Democratic bench in 2016. We have a few really good possibilities out there as of yet unexplored. I almost wish Cantwell were married. It’d shoot her right up to the top of consideration.
@moops: Wow, you are actually a dipshit. One sees such a thing so rarely. Damn.
@ the so-called Omnes Omnibus:
sure. word salad.
The best summary I have at this point is “your opinion from experience is invalid, if you were more regular your anecdote would be worth considering”
at least Yutsano demanded recent polling data, which I couldn’t produce. I copped to that, about three times now.
Fine, immigrants are a lock. Better ?
I honestly did not see a viable contender in the list presented for 2016. the GOP was in better shape at this point with contenders at this stage last time. Perry was viable, Romney was already running.
If they aren’t a Senator or Congress member or Governor by now, or in the running for it, then what chance do they have? Obama was as junior as they get, and he was up for Senator by now.
So, who’s on stage in September in Charlotte ? A mayor from San Antonio ? A big local like Hagan could use the stage to solidify support in a shaky seat, but they aren’t contenders for 2016.
They usually announce that a couple of months before the convention. There will be more than one speaking opportunity however. Plenty of time to showcase off new talents as well as build up enthusiasm.
You’re dead wrong here, and you are prognosticating that the Dem establishment isn’t going to acknowledge specific prominent progressives or mainstream centrists/lefties that have made even the faintest of impressions by the time arrives that Obama wants to consider a possible successor. Hell, even with the Bush Presidency, GWB felt more comfortable with Obama running the country rather than McCain. Bush was a moron who ran for re-elect using Karl Rove’s 50% +1 strategy, not on populism or hoping to really unify the country. He couldn’t hope to have a true successor, and the proof of that is that Obama’s opposition haven’t mention George Bush ONCE in their eleventy-hundredfinity GOP debates. Candidates from Bush’s party don’t want to run on Bush’s record.
When the time comes for the next Democratic candidate, they will either run on recovering Obama’s lost agenda in the face of yet another disastrous Republican Presidency, or they will run on continuing it after he is forced to leave office in 2016.
So again, for right now, the motivation is Team Fuck Yeah, or Bust. 2016 is for the David Plouffe’s that are 5-10 years younger than the for-realsies Mr. Plouffe.
@moops: If you’re talking big convention speeches, here is my best guess….
I’m guessing we might get to see Ms. Warren on da stage, she speaks well, and she understands money issues and can present those ideas in easier to understand nuggets than anyone else i’ve heard before.
others…. my guess is that you’ll also see Ms. Giffords if her recovery continues apace…..
Debbie Wasserman Schultz is another educated guess as is Ms. Gilliland from NY, showing women in charge and positions of power will play well compared to the grumpy old man party.
That I can see. She should be on her way to a seat by that point, and would make for a good candidate. She would make a great candidate, or as great VP to go on the attack.
Giffords will appear, but she is not in the running if I understand her statements. I don’t know why you use Ms. as a title though. She is married. Does she use Ms. as her title?
I’m not as enthusiastic about Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Chairing the DNC does not make a great post. There isn’t a President in their history. She will speak, and that might create a buzz, we’ll see.
FWIW Plouffe is in his late 30’s/early 40’s. And Axelrod is 50ish. They’re both going to be quite active come 2016.
@piratedan: Yeah. I’m going to guess that this will be a replay of the 1990s conventions where the Dems are positive and the Reps have that “Fuck You for Watching this Convention if You’re Not One of Us” vibe, now with Marco Rubio and Nikki Haley giving speeches in the hopes that the kids will be attracted to “diversity with a negative message.”
I doubt they’ll make the mistake of giving the keynote nomination speech’s to a bombthrower, though. That doesn’t go well for them. I could imagine Pawlenty. Someone very safe and not likely to go on a rant about the need to pass laws banning sharia.
It’s worth a bit, I was just thinking of the unknown who’s the guy behind the next guy. BTW, our bloghost is feeling a bit unmoored at the moment upthread. Throw him some love.
I was trying to see if any BJ commentators could actually guess the line up. Even Warren is a very green prospect. Is there no bench here to take up the mantel from a strong incumbent? The GOP will be a mess in 2012. They are going to lose, and afterwards have some wilderness time. I gave my opinion on what that was going to look like. What I don’t see are strong candidates to take up a swing to the left that this election should be setting up.
“Team Fuck Yeah” from freelancer is short term thinking. One thing we have learned from the GOP is they know how to work long game messaging. they always think about the next cycle, and the one beyond that. At least, their smokey room buttheads do. I think the DNC needs to put up a succession plan soon.
@moops: she’s known as Gabby Giffords, hence Ms. Giffords instead of Mrs Kelly… I thought u were trolling for the next wave of Dem politicians on their way up… and despite Gabby not running, if she completes her recovery (and no one in her district is counting against it) she could be back in the spotlight by 2014.
I don’t see many young men of note climbing their way thru the ranks at the moment, maybe that will change with this next round or folks being inspired with the next general election.
With any luck Grandpa Walnuts will either kick off the mortal coil or decide to retire by then. Open seat = she could win quite handily.
Pretty fucking pathetic when all you got is what Scarah fuckin Failin posted on twitter or whatever.
I know this is a political blog and all but sheezus! She’s irrelevant and has been for some time thank god. Christ, go on google news and there are 20 stories right there that are a thousand times more relevant than some pathetic post of what snowbilly grifters hired help twatted or posted on facehook.
@Yutsano: no, this is Axelrod’s last campaign, he says.
I’m not confident Giffords can recover. Her resignation was hard. She is not able to serve her current function. Even with total recovery the public would doubt her competence. McCain and Dole were functioning at 90% when they ran and there were questions about their feebleness. Reagan managed to hide his disability to get elected. Giffords’ trauma was too public. If she tap-danced on stage it might work.
I like her chances for a seat, but she probably won’t be a Presidential contender in 2016.
@xian: Fair enough. He can still stay active in other ways beyond being involved directly. It does get into the blood.
My favorite part of the Sarah screed:
When your own supporters feel like they have to tell everyone, “Hey, he’s not perfect, but …”, then you know you’re in trouble.
Given that Mitt’s supporters feel the need to do the same thing, I think we’ve got a good start on November.
Probably. Giffords is her maiden name. Most women who keep their maiden name after marriage continue to use Ms. It’s marriage neutral, unlike Mrs. or Miss. And Mrs. doesn’t make a lot of sense if a woman hasn’t taken her husband’s name.
when Palin became part of the GOP ticket, that is when i stopped being a republican. i said then….to Ross and Reihan and Jim Manzi and Conor Friedersdorf that Palin was the Doom of the GOP.
That she would sunder the party along the intellectual fault line that separates the elites from the base.
Not because she was a proud ignoramus (props Hitch)… but because she insisted that being a proud ignoramus was perfectly adequate to be a heartbeat away from President of the US,
She refused to play Galatea to the GOP elites Pygmalion.
She broke the model.
Now the only real issue is the demographic timer. Even this year may be too late for the GOP to reclaim the wh, and its only going to get worse for them in the forseeable future. The GOP candidate needs 65% of the white vote to win.
And with Romney that is even more impossible. Many WECs wont vote for him because of anti-mormon sentiment– sure, they will attribute it to something else. But a GOP candidate cannot win without carrying the south, and WECs are 50% of the GOP base now.
Demographics is destiny.
Heres a single from my hit parade going out to Ross and Reihan.
She would have been formidable if she had just taken instruction like a good little bot.
Minnesota toooooo! Plus we have Al!
@JGabriel: Mrs works perfectly well as a marriage indicator, assuming ones wishes to flag that status — I don’t really see why it has to be a flag of what the spouses name is. It’s not as though the marriages are any less real if one party doesn’t abdicate their name is it? Maybe what we’re missing is a masculine equivalent of Mr. to flag his marital status. Because that’s all they really are, just little non-digital status tags, used to be age/marital status, now mostly just the latter.
@moops: You read a lot of sci-fi dystopias, don’t you? And in this dystopia there’s no pushback from any of us. The learned helplessness of the left…
From my perspective, your several comments on this post are concern trolling.
If it walks like a duck, etc.
@Scott: Shadows And Portents | My Ready Room
[…] It’s early, WAY too early, for predictions, so here comes one anyway […]
Dude…Obama was a half term senator when he was elected president. Invalid point is especially invalid in context
@moops: When Obama stepped on the stage of his first convention, he was a nobody too. If “the mayor” can knock it out of the park, a superstar is born. If not… he’ll still be a solid Hispanic democrat.
1. What is concern trolling? I was under the impression that trolling is contrarian factoids or bully repetition spiced with mindless name calling. Moops is doing none of that.
Expressing thoughts that generate other constructive thoughts make an internet dialogue- not a gospel choir.
2. Sherrod Brown is a possibility for 2016.
My prediction for 2016…
Jay Nixon – incumbent governor, and former attorney general of Missouri
@Palli: Concern trolling.
All of this conversation forgets the most important thing– election fraud, ballot tabulation crimes.
With this capacity to rewrite cast ballots, every election will be close and the good candidate will only win if there is a vast majority of Americans voting for in their favor; so vast that tabulation fraud would be too obvious to ignore.
Thanks- would you consider my occasional comments about election fraud concern trolling? I hope not, because I try to think positively and only harp when I feel it may be forgotten as we talk about a progressive future.
@Yutsano: i forget what he said he was planning but i think it was maybe teaching, or setting up some sort of nonprofit in chicago?
Absolutely Romney — it was never in doubt — and the general will be much closer than it would in a sane country, Obama by 2-4 percent.
@Palli: There is a difference between concern trolling and concern. We all have concerns and worries about politics; some rational, some not. Raising a concern does not make one a concern troll.
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
@moops: I’m a legal immigrant and so are half the people I work with. None of us as far as I know loathe illegal immigrants. Just another anecdata.
@kvenlander: Oh, missed the whole flame war by premature commenting. Carry on.
What happens next is she shows up as Gingrich’s VP pick for his independent run, after he loses the primary.