Open Thread

What's going on today?

Update [2008-1-10 17:34:48 by Todd Beeton]:I'm with kos.

With a history of meddling in our primaries, why don't we try and return the favor. Next Tuesday, January 15th, Michigan will hold its primary. Michigan Democrats should vote for Mitt Romney, because if Mitt wins, Democrats win. [...]

...Poor Mitt Romney, who’s suffered back-to-back losses in the last week, desperately needs to win Michigan in order to keep his campaign afloat...And we want Romney in, because the more Republican candidates we have fighting it out, trashing each other with negative ads and spending tons of money, the better it is for us. We want Mitt to stay in the race, and to do that, we need him to win in Michigan.

Now here's the thing...this is an open primary. Anyone can pick up a Republican ballot. So Michigan Democrats and independents who want to see the Republican battle royale continue should just take a few minutes on Tuesday, January 15th to cast a ballot for Mitt Romney in the Republican primary.

If you know someone in Michigan, send them the email I've included below the fold. If you don't know someone in Michigan, send the email to your liberal friends and see if THEY have friends in Michigan. Get the word out, whether by blog, mailing list, MySpace or Facebook page, or whatever.

If we can help push Mitt over the line, not only do we help keep their field fragmented, but we also pollute Romney's victory. How "legitimate" will the Mittster's victory look if liberals provide the margin of victory? Think of the hilarity that will ensue. We'll simply be adding fuel to their civil war, never a bad thing from our vantage point.

Not to mention the added benefit of halting McCain's mo'.



Display:


Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

There's a sale at J.C. Penny's.


by IowaCubs on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:27:35 PM EST

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

On shirts?  I need a shirt.


by Zeitgeist9000 on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:33:39 PM EST

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

I think this is terrible advice. There's always the chance we'll biff a third election in our row - the last two were ours to lose, too. If we lose, do we really want it to be to MITT FRICKIN ROMNEY?

I say, take no chances. Hope they nominate the least bad of their candidates, on the off chance we do lose. I don't think we will, but hope for the best, plan for the worst.


Ever heard of a Blue Moose Democrat?
by Nathan Empsall on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:39:24 PM EST

Re: Open Thread (2.00 / 1)

You can actually make a very reasonable case that Romney would be the best President from the Republican side.

I think I'm going to suggest this idea to my dad.  I'm not sure he'll be willing to vote for a Republican, though.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:42:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

I recall Yglesias making this case (Romney=least terrible republican president) not too long ago. I wanted to be persuaded, but ultimately I was convinced. The problem with Mitt is that it's impossible to predict what he will do in office. He's so ideologically/politically flexible, and there's reason to believe he would be influenced by pressure from the worst interest groups within the republican party.

FWIW, I think Guiliani would be the worst president.


by DPW on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:48:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

Should have said: "ultimately, I was NOT convinced."


by DPW on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:49:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

We do agree about Giuliani, that much is true.


Ever heard of a Blue Moose Democrat?
by Nathan Empsall on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:53:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

If one thinks Romney is their most reasonable candidate, fine - I disagree, but that is a respectable rationale. It is not, however, the rationale Kos and Jerome are using, and I'm arguing more with their motivation than their actual suggestion.


Ever heard of a Blue Moose Democrat?
by Nathan Empsall on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:53:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You have to remember (none / 0)

Any Republican will want to be re-elected for a second term.  So they will have to spend their first 4 tacking hard right.


by dpANDREWS on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 07:47:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You have to remember (none / 0)

That doesn't make any sense to me.  They're looking to win another general election in 4 years, they're not looking to recapture the Republican nomination in 4 years.

Why would governing as an extremist help you get reelected?


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 07:58:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ask Bush 41 and Bush 43 (none / 0)

Ask Bush 41 what happens when you break a tax promise in your first term and your base turns on you.

Ask Bush 43 what happens when the base is lukewarm and isn't sold on you when you run (Bush can thank the Supreme Court for bailing him out), and what happens when you turn your base on.   Bush used a turned on and turned out base to beat John Kerry who recieved more votes than any other Democratic Presidential candidate EVER.


by dpANDREWS on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 08:07:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

There will be a Supreme Court nominee (none / 0)

100% chance in the first term, there will be an appointment.

What will happen to a Republican President who nominates a moderate to the court?  

Will his base ignore it and elect him again?

Or will they turn on him with a frenzy as they see their 30 year battle for a solidly rightwing court go down the tubes?


by dpANDREWS on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 08:10:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

I'm pretty sure Romney IS the least bad of their candidates. Huckabee is a big fat unknown, and has some flat out crazy ideas. McCain -- and I hope no one is falling for his "maverick" thing again -- is as conservative as they get, with just one or two very narrow exceptions that he probably wouldn't act on. We'll get war after war after war with him in the White House. Romney, at least in several past versions, was quite liberal. Who knows? This conservative thing we're seeing now might be the bigger act. I suspect it is. If I have to have an R, I think I'd prefer a "manager" and definitely not a crusader like Huckabee or a bitter old man like McCain.


by ColoradoGuy on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:44:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

Those two are actually the ones I respect - but that and our disagreement over Romney aside, I'm ok with folks voting for Romney because they think he's the most reasonable of their options. I just hate the thought of voting for him - or anyone - because they'd be the easiest to beat. The reasoning is my target.


Ever heard of a Blue Moose Democrat?
by Nathan Empsall on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:54:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

Part of me wants to encourage Michigan voters to vote uncommitted in the dem primary, since it stands to benefit Obama. However, if it turns out that there isn't really much likelihood of a strong uncommitted turnout, then I think a vote for Romney is a great idea. In fact, I think it may be more important to slow down McCain's momentun than to give Obama a tiny bump from strong uncommitted turnout.


by DPW on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:42:24 PM EST

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

I would think that it would be hard to motivate people to come out for uncommitted. It's hard enough to get people to come out with out the extra added "voting for nobody".


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 07:23:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

I would instead vote uncommitted in order to help Obama.  


by Toddwell on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 05:50:13 PM EST

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

The idea that voting "uncommitted" would help Obama seems extremely remote to me and based upon numerous assumptions that are unlikely to come to pass.  1) the MI delegates would actually have to be counted, without it causing a riot; 2) somehow the uncommitted vote would be divided up amongst the candidates other than Hillary, despite the fact that the votes would represent an aggregate of votes for multiple candidates; 3) the difference in delegate totals between Hillary and Obama would have to be less than the total number of Michigan delegates, in order to push Obama over the top.  If #3 really were the case, and that's what helped win Obama the nomination despite the fact that the candidates were told that those delegates would not be seated and there would be no way to verify Obama's actual MI vote total, then it would cause a full-scale Democratic civil war.  


by rfahey22 on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 06:20:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

Voting uncommitted certainly hurts Hillary in the sense that if she loses to uncommitted, the media narrative becomes horrible for her and that hurts her in other states.  Whether it makes a difference in the ultimate allocation of delegates, who knows.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 07:03:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

Whoever wrote this is an idiot. Mitt is trying to claim the mantle of "Michigan Man". If he wins here, the story will be that he united the fiscal and christian conservatives around one candidacy. That is NOT what you want.

If you want to be smart, have people vote for Huckabee. Remember, we were a Robertson state way back when.


"What do Barack Obama and David Koresh have in common? Too god damn much."
by ThinkingDem on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 06:07:20 PM EST

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

What's up with your tag line?

I think if McCain is their nominee and Hillary is ours, it will be a very interesting race!


by Zeitgeist9000 on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 06:25:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

I hate conservatives, first and foremost.  

Conservatives are going ape crazy over the prospect of either Huckabee or McCain being their nominee.  They have talked themselves into the theme that McCain is aided only by Democrats and Independents, that Republicans don't want him to be the nominee, and that Huckabee is only in the race to help McCain get rid of Romney as a viable candidate BEFORE the race moves onto closed primaries.  That is a very damaging theme for McCain and Huckabee, as they are now building McCain and Huckabee into their "to be defeated at all cost" enemy.   Listen to Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, et al to see where the conservative mind is at this point on their candidates.   I am thinking that if either McCain or Huckabee are nominated, against the very strong wishes of conservatives, the GOP will probably splinter apart, and Conservatives will wash their hands from this process.  There is a good chance that Conservatives will run a candidate of their own to counteract the dreaded and now fully dispised Huckabee/McCain tandem.    That means to me that Huckabee is probably the best case scenario, with Conservatives hating most of what he stands for, and he is also not as strong as McCain as our opponent.  


by georgep on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 06:26:35 PM EST

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

Actually I think that Huckabee is their best case scenario in general simply because the evangelicals love him and social conservatives are about 70% of the party.

I hear plenty of Republicans say that they hate Romney. I've also heard plenty of them talk about how they hate Huckabee. And plenty of them talk about how they hate McCain.

The evangelicals hate Romney because he's a mormon. The wall street types like him.

The evangelicals love Huckabee but the club for growther's hate Huckabee because he doesn't think that tax cuts are the solution for every ecomonic ill.

They all hate McCain because of his immigration stance which ironically makes him the strongest in the general election. I don't think any hispanics will vote for the GOP if it's Romney or Huckabee.

They could very well have a brokered convention because they have a couple of different interests who want it "their way". Watch the primaries. There will probably be a different winner in each state.

NV-McCain
SC-Huckabee
FL-?

They could all probably get behind Thompson if he would bother to get out of bed and run a campaign. Maybe.

You guys think we're divided right now? The GOP is 10x.


No longer a Democrat, now proudly an independent voter!
by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 07:33:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

I'll be glad when the primaries are over, and I can go back to hating Republicans.


by Bush Bites on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 06:29:13 PM EST

I am voting UNCOMMITTED (none / 0)

I am really opposed to Hillary Clinton getting the nomination, and if she can't get a majority of the votes on a ballot with no other frontrunners, that sends a nice message for me.

I am not going to vote for Romney because I would kick myself if he got the nomination and won the general election.

Since a Hillary nomination would probably lead to Bloomberg and Naders getting in the race, a Romney win isn't that far fetched.


by skipos on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 06:38:14 PM EST

voting Repub in Michigan (none / 0)

I hope I'm not the only one who thinks this is a bad idea not because of potential blow-back, as it were, but rather because it is ethically questionable.  If Republicans were to start voting in Democratic primaries in large numbers simply to screw with the result, people here would howl.  Raising the bar of acceptable behavior seems like a good thing for the country as a whole.


Obviously you're not a golfer.
by alydar on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 06:46:43 PM EST

Re: voting Repub in Michigan (2.00 / 1)

As Markos documents, there is a long, long history of Republicans doing this to us in Michigan.  I doubt they will ever stop unless they see Democrats are willing to turn the tables on them.

You'd be hard-pressed to show me any tangible benefit we've received from "being better than them" all these years.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 06:53:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: voting Repub in Michigan (none / 0)

Wait, so the logical thing to do, if you want to see something stop, is to do it yourself and hope the other side stops first?  

While I cannot speak knowledgeably about Michigan primary politics, I would think that one tangible benefit of not racing to the bottom of the bag of dirty tricks is that the American public seems to trust Democrats more on almost every issue.  It has taken awhile, but perhaps people are starting to see through the cynicism that has driven Rove-era politics.


Obviously you're not a golfer.
by alydar on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 09:38:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: voting Repub in Michigan (none / 0)

If someone, for example, keeps punching you in the face, over and over again, a good way to get them to stop is to punch them back.  

This has been going on for decades.  It will not stop on its own.  Nor has a massive wave of trust swept over the Democrats of Michigan because the Republicans do things like this.  I realize that in the perfect world, it ought to.


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 09:45:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Tomorrow is... (none / 0)

Orange Day!

JANUARY 11, 2008, is the six-year anniversary of the first arrival of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay.

On January 11, we are calling on everyone opposed to torture and indefinite detention to WEAR ORANGE to symbolize their sadness and disgust with the national shame that is Guantánamo Bay.

http://www.aclu.org/safefree/detention/c loseguantanamo.html?rsc=mydd


Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 06:58:40 PM EST

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

Mitt "over the line?"
Just push J5 on the jukebox
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xewL59PQ- _8
"If you want to end war and stuff, you gotta sing loud"...Arlo Guthrie
by nogo war on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 07:02:44 PM EST

Re: Ned Lamont Endorses Obama (none / 0)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/10/ 184519/630/624/434646


by Bush Bites on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 07:28:42 PM EST

Because Majority Leader Frist... (none / 0)

...not to mention control of all the committees in the 110th Congress would be better right?

We wouldn't want to be nice to Lieberman before the 2006 election was decided and have him vote with the GOP on the organization of the Senate out of spite would we?


by lestatdelc on Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 08:49:35 PM EST

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

Regardless of whether you decide to vote for Clinton, vote uncommitted, vote as a Republican, or just stay home, please let the Democratic leadership know how you feel about our fiasco of a primary this year!  Letting only part of the nation elect our national leaders weakens our democracy, and weakens the Democratic party.  You can find some more information, and some ideas on contacting the Democratic leadership, at http://WhoStoleMiVote.org


by sgifford on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 01:00:38 AM EST

Re: Open Thread (none / 0)

It is great to see the Daily Kos putting this out about voting for Romney.  Why don't they just put up a big banner saying "We Are Terrified of John McCain and Mike Huckabee!!"  

Unless this is reverse pyschology at its finest, this is a good thing for McCain and Huckabee.  


by ditka on Fri Jan 11, 2008 at 12:46:27 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.