• on a comment on Here we go again. over 6 years ago

    of voter suppression schemes is that there's often little that can be done to remedy the damage, after the fact. A judge can order a polling place to remain open late, but he can't order a voter who's given up and gone home to come back and cast a ballot. Fraud and sabotage can be punished, but they can't truly be undone, no matter how many lawyers you have.

    Ohio in 2004 is a fantastic example of this. When Kerry said "the votes aren't there" he was absolutely right -- that's the point. Votes never cast can't be recounted. That's why duping, frustrating, or scaring people out of their vote is a favored tactic.

    I certainly hope the Obama campaign makes a concerted effort to educate voters about their rights and what to be ready for, but the thing I find frustrating is that this is one of those rare problems which can be largely solved simply by talking about it -- by making people aware -- and it seems that people are (once again) getting too swept up in the campaign to bother. We get really interested in these problems every two years -- just after the elections, but by the time the next cycle rolls around, history just repeats itself.

  • on a comment on Here we go again. over 6 years ago

    as I said, it's been a while since I've had time to really follow this site. I only see the front page stuff, and I'm not even talking about MyDD in particular -- it seems like every site I'm subscribed to has more or less completely forgotten about this issue.

    This is just the site where I was the most active, a couple years ago, so I came here to complain, as it were.

  • comment on a post Did McCain get 21 Iraqis' murdered? over 7 years ago

    that whether the murders were tied to the photo op or not, it perfectly illustrates what an irresponsible act the whole "market stroll" was.

    We've already heard how occupation forces have to stage raids on Iraqi businesses to cover up the fact that they're actually cooperating with those businesses.

    And in that climate a Presidential candidate decides to indulge in this self-serving bit of PR to cover for his own bull$#!+ partisan rhetoric.

    I was a big fan of McCain, warts and all, but this stunt crossed a line. F@ck him.

  • they think having to drop McCain now will harm the Reeps' prospects more than hitting him with it later?

    In a general election, the assertion that McCain considered becoming a Dem isn't going to be a persuasive argument to vote for the Dem over McCain. It's too spinnable in that context.

    "The Dems are accusing me of wanting to join them. Apparently even they think that's something to be ashamed of."

    But if it sinks his fundraising ability now, cripples him in the primaries (and the primary campaign is going on), they never have to worry about him in the general.

    Also, these aren't the kind of revelations you can just drop right before an election and expect to have believed. The credibility of the assertions stems from the fact that they're coming out of the mouths of Dems. That means there's no way to put the story out without everybody realizing it's coming from the Dems. And that means that the closer to an election the story comes out, more likely voters are to assume that the story is intended to influence the election.

    So you sow the seeds now and let the story trickle, and watch the Reep candidate who'd be the most difficult to take down in the general, flame out in the primaries.

    Makes sense to me.

    I just wonder if the claims are true.

  • comment on a post Some Exit Poll Information over 7 years ago

    the link in your post is not a link.

  • comment on a post George Bush and Joe Lieberman, on 9/11 over 7 years ago

    it'll be Castro's fault."

  • Snow and other Bushistas have made similar comments about Beirut (Reagan) and other incidents in the past. As have many others. What they're all getting at is that the old policy of kicking over national governments but then not staging massive occupations and forcibly commandeering national economies just won't work anymore, and that's why we needed to colonize Iraq.

  • on a comment on Ned Wins over 8 years ago

    My experience thus far indicates that it's never safe to assume that the Dems "aren't stupid enough" to do something. But in his case, you certainly seem to be right.

  • comment on a post Oh Yes over 8 years ago

    the RNC sent to its mailing list today, under the subject line "Weak and Wrong: Today's Defeat-ocrats":

    In politics, there are turning points that can define a political party for decades to come. Yesterday's defeat of Senator Joe Lieberman in the Democrat primary in Connecticut is such a moment. Because he stood for a strong national defense and victory in Iraq, Joe Lieberman was successfully targeted for defeat.

    For a political party to reject a respected Senator who just six years ago was its candidate for Vice President is virtually without precedent. It speaks volumes about the new Democrat Party: if you stand for a strong defense and victory in the War on Terror, you have no place in the party and you must be purged.

    [ . . . ]

    The message from Connecticut is clear, and Ned Lamont isn't alone. He is joined by Rep. John Murtha, architect of the Democrats' position on Iraq and the man who wants to be the next House Majority Leader, who claims America is more dangerous than Iran and North Korea and says, "We've become the enemy." And by Howard Dean, who calls the idea of victory in Iraq "just plain wrong."

  • on a comment on Ned Wins over 8 years ago

    I think people are coming to recognize that Hillary's a crass opportunist but a bloody effective scrapper. I was heartened by the rumor that Reid offered to annoint her as the Senate Dem leader in 2008 if she'd not run for President.

    The important thing is that she doesn't play into the Reep narrative of Dem division that will inevitably emerge if establishment Dems start backing Lieberman over Lamont now that the primary's over. She may not help much, but at least she's not hurting. Sometimes that's the best you can hope for.

  • on a comment on Ned Wins over 8 years ago

    Hillary not supporting Lieberman.

    Considering that the polling for the general indicated that Lieberman would win in a three-way, keeping the "centrists" from backing Joe is essential to finishing what was started tonight.

    Granted, that polling was done before Joe lost the primary, but it's still going to be an uphill climb for Lamont.

  • on a comment on Ned Wins over 8 years ago

    at TPM Muckraker.

    Quick and dirty: Hosting company employees say Joementum's account was good for over 400 gigs/month; server files are apparently being turned over to the FBI.

    My gut is still telling me this was a stunt by some Lieberman backer, but Lord only knows how it's going to play out.

    Anyway, yeah.

  • comment on a post Ned Wins over 8 years ago

    posted a teaser about an hour ago for some new dirt on the joe2006.com fiasco "shortly" -- as in tonight, I assume. Something to keep an eye on.

  • comment on a post MyDD Hacked! over 8 years ago

    that the joe2006 frontpage was initially replaced with some comments about the site being pwned by teh h4x0rz.

    Was that just something the Lieberfeebs put out or has it been confirmed?

  • comment on a post Operation Democracy Comics, volume 1 over 8 years ago

    before I decided they just don't like you linking to the images directly, they want you to link to blogspot pages with those images on them.

    Use Photobucket or Flickr and you should have no trouble hot-linking and/or using img tags here:

    Photobucket resizes larger images to 1MB, but that should be plenty for most purposes.


Advertise Blogads