Comments on: Chickens, roost, etc.

By: Paul Burns

Paul Burns — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 14:06:57 +0000

Obama e-mails describe what is going on in NH as something more than an ordinary campaign. Apparently campaign offices etc., can feel the energy. As part of this spiele is to collect a $25 donation, one has to bear that fact in mind when interpreting this info. But it does appear to be something out of the ordinary, when one recalls the expectations from ths Clinton camp. Some of you may have seen on the TV news, Edwards interpreting Hilary’s tearful display this morning as a sign of feminine weakness, and therefore, unfitness for the Presidency. Had to happen sooner than later. I reckon all the candidates, Republican and Democrat, are unfit for the job, because they’ve all got too much money.

By: Enemy Combatant

Enemy Combatant — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 06:21:30 +0000

Roger, base.

By: Mark

Mark — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 06:16:43 +0000

EC, you got caught by the spaminator. Remember not to re-post – that compounds the false positive because part of its algorithm is to look for comments repeated. Much better to drop us a line.

By: Enemy Combatant

Enemy Combatant — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 06:16:00 +0000

Mark, Much apprecite it if you have a mo s’il vous plait; had two attempts to post a relevant, even zeitgeistish comment. Suspect that my corobborating link has earned the wrath of the spaminator. Merci, EC.

By: Enemy Combatant

Enemy Combatant — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 05:57:22 +0000

“New Hampshire Weather Forecast
Unusually warm temperatures and clear skies will likely lead to record turnout in tomorrow’s New Hampshire primary.

Key finding: Clinton has regained some support among woman voters age 25 to 49 and that appears to have stopped her slide. This race still turns on age, however, with Obama leading Clinton 43% to 27% among voters age 18 to 64 (comprising 83% of the vote), while Clinton leads among voters 65 years and older 50% to 25%.

Quote of the Day
“You don’t want to be looking back five years from now and saying the American people really rose up and changed America, and I was sitting on the couch.”
– Sen. Barack Obama, quoted by NBC News, urging people in New Hampshire to vote tomorrow.

http://politicalwire.com/

CBet latest. There has been major movement.
President – WINNER
OBAMA, Barack 1.95
CLINTON, Hillary 3.50
MCCAIN, John 7.50
GIULIANI, Rudolph 8.00
ROMNEY, Mitt 13.00
HUCKABEE, Mike 14.00
BLOOMBERG, Michael 21.00
PAUL, Ron 26.00
EDWARDS, John 34.00

Obama has stormed into market favouritism in the last 48 hours.
Don’t wish to sound trite, but Significant History is happenin’ here.

By: Down and Out of Sài Gòn

Down and Out of Sài Gòn — Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:22:35 +0000

Journalismus als Beruf, or Why Oh Why Can’t We Have a Better Press Corps? Where Brad de Long gets all Weber on the reporters’ asses.

Weber wants to see a world in which the politically active live both “for” and “off” politics. He believes that if the politically active live only “for” politics–well, then we have a political class of rentiers and plutocrats, which is not healthy. It must be possible to not just make a difference but make a living off of politics if we are to have a healthy politics and a good society. But just as it is bad to have a politically-active class that lives “for” but not “off” politics, so I believe it is probably worse to have a politically-active class that lives “off” but not “for” politics–in which the desires to make a difference and to help America are submerged beneath the desire to keep your paycheck coming.

By: Enemy Combatant

Enemy Combatant — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 23:13:03 +0000

Geez, this is novel. Plattered attitude from a world-weary French prawn.

By: A Plate of Shrimp

A Plate of Shrimp — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:48:48 +0000

#5: “Obama would be more idealistic for who he is rather than his policies…”

#8: “Obama, it seems to me, is a candidate of symbolism, more for who he is…”

Which is what? A privileged, expensively-educated, comically unaccomplished white guy with big ears, obvious father problems, and a past clouded by questions about drugs, who talks a good game in the campaign phase, but only in the vaguest of terms? No, wait, sorry, that was George W. Bush.

Plus ca change…

By: Andrew Reynolds

Andrew Reynolds — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 08:19:37 +0000

Perhaps a little more “reaching out”and rhetoric and a bit less government spending will be a good start. Unfortunately, that sort of reaching out normally comes with a fistful of (tax) dollars.
Symbolism I do not mind: it is the action that (mostly) falls way short of the symbols that is the problem.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 07:49:40 +0000

Credit goes to Trevor, Andrew!

Obama, it seems to me, is a candidate of symbolism, more for who he is than what he stands for – perhaps that’s another parallel with Rudd. But I don’t know how much substance there is beneath the soaring rhetoric. How is “reaching out” and that sort of blah going to address rising unemployment and soaring healthcare or college tuition bills, for instance?

By: Andrew Reynolds

Andrew Reynolds — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 07:43:01 +0000

Well put, Mark.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 07:29:36 +0000

Obama is busy tacking right to attract Republican and Independent votes in open primaries.

Summed up neatly here by Trevor Cook:

ABC Online.

Parallels have been drawn between US Presidential hopeful Barack Obama and Prime Minister Rudd.

The biggest point of comparison might be there ability to convey an impression of change without being all that clear on the specifics.

http://trevorcook.typepad.com/weblog/2008/01/obama-and-rudd.html

By: Andrew Reynolds

Andrew Reynolds — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 06:44:38 +0000

Jacques,
I would have thought it would be Edwards vs. Paul. Edwards has the more ~~identifiable~~ identifiably Democratic / democratic socialist platform. Obama would be more idealistic for who he is rather than his policies, which, to the extent they are clear, are middle of the road.

By: Jacques Chester

Jacques Chester — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 06:28:10 +0000

I think that for idealistic hacks on both sides the ideal election would be Obama vs Paul.

By: Australian Atheist

Australian Atheist — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 03:08:56 +0000

I disagree with much of Ron Paul’s platform but his presence is so important at the Republican debates.

For example in this clip (also from C&Ls) he forces the other candidates to justify their view that American foreign policy has nothing to do with terrorism directed at the US.

Whatever your opinion on that question, at least viewers are better able to understand how the candidates view the ‘war on terror’.

Without Paul a lot of foreign policy assumptions would have gone unchallenged and therefore unexplained.

By: professor rat

professor rat — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 01:57:52 +0000

Mmmm…I think we may have to have a new look at taxing the all the church’s.
After all,’ No taxation without representation ,’ cuts both ways.
Also we must end the governor-generalate. Because, after all, the monarchy discriminates against at least one religion and we can’t afford that sort of perceived bias today, can we.

By: wilful

wilful — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 00:16:08 +0000

I’ve hardly followed the Democratic priamries, and not followed at all the Republican ones, but from a distant view it seems that the Republican candidates all have major flaws: Huckabee seems to be a simpleton religious nutjob, Romney a mormon, McCain too old and Guiliani a spiv (and too liberal for the GOP).