• comment on a post Research 2000 gets the "Zogby Award" 2008 over 5 years ago

    how the hell do you know how "off" R2K was in the days preceding the election?  Could it not simply have been tracking late deciders or vacillators?

    As far as I know, they didn't tweak their methodology just before election day.

  • I couldn't find any results on the 60+ demo anywhere.

    So, if your poll is correct, R2K was off by one point on the senior demo.  Why Jerome uses this to trash R2K is beyond me.  A victim of confirmation bias, maybe?

  • R2K model for 60+: 22%

    Actual result for 65+: 16%.  So the question is how many voters fall between 60 and 65. BRB.

  • comment on a post Research 2000 gets the "Zogby Award" 2008 over 5 years ago

    *R2K said voters above 60 years of age would comprise 22 percent, I said higher, and it was at least 24 percent.

    Hmm, I seem to recall Markos claiming the 60+ result was lower.  Will look this up.  I'll bet it's the difference between 60+ and 65+.

    In the meantime, let me do a little Frist-like diagnosis over a blog.  Anyone else find it curious that Jerome mentions:

    1) That this blog is not his primary source of income?

    2) That Markos is "chest-thumping" and "pointing fingers"?

    3) That the poll Markos paid for, because Markos rakes in so much dough on dKos, deserves to be conflated with a poll many bloggers and especially Markos has disdain for?

    Methinks Kos' blogfather has grown a little jealous of the blogchild's success.

  • on a comment on Tomboy Fatwa. over 5 years ago

    feel threatened by little girls displaying behavior patters traditionally associated with boys?

    Insecure paranoid fools, the lot of them.  Thank God that however screwed up our Democracy is, Tom Coburn can't issue a fatwa against "rampant lesbianism" in girls' bathrooms.

  • comment on a post Tomboy Fatwa. over 5 years ago

    The way these unaccountable "Fatwa Council"s can issue these kinds of crazy edicts shows the importance of respect for real Democracy.

    The best hope for now is that its enforcement will be quietly ignored by conscientious civil servants who have bigger fish to fry anyway.

  • on a comment on delete over 5 years ago

    I don't think the RNC gets matching funds.  And I believe you only get matching funds for the primary; for the GE the McCain campaign gets a lump $84 million.  But I'm sketchy on the details too.

    Thing is, either way, they're spending this money on clothes when it could be spent on GOTV or advertising.  All the better for us.

  • on a comment on Who Will Be #60? over 5 years ago

    If we had two normal political parties I might agree, too.  But we have a gang of timid incrementalists and a gang of frothing sociopaths.  The risks of giving the incrementalists one-party rule are far outweighed by giving the sociopaths any leverage whatsoever.

    I want the Republican Party, in its current form, to die.  Let the principled libertarians and Rockefeller moderates pick up the pieces once the current cabal is gone.  Then if the Dems overreach or become corrupted, they can make their comeback.

  • on a comment on Who Will Be #60? over 5 years ago

    in terms of the budget.  The BIG fight where 60 will matter will be on healthcare.  A Martin or Lunsford victory would have a huge impact on how watered-down the final version of the healthcare bill is going to be.  Republicans already concede the need for reform, but the effectiveness of their whining about socialized medicine is directly proportional to the number of Senators who believe that crap.

    In fact, I would say 59 is more of a magic number than 60, for one reason: Arlen Specter.  He's up for reelection in 2010, is in his 70s, has Hotchkins disease and is the second most moderate Repub after Olympia Snowe.  He has little to fear from a Repub backlash in a light blue state (even if he runs again) and a huge potantial backlash to face among indies and Dems in light-blue PA if he's the key holdout.  The perception of his own mortality may cause him to feel a bit more for those who are fighting with insurance companies to cover their cancer treatments.

    Collins (if she survives) and especially Snowe could also see the light.  So I agree 60 is not all that important.  What I would most like to see is the retirement of the Senate's Greatest Douchebags: Inhofe the oil industry tool, Cornyn the mindless petty partisan and Roberts the snivelling illegal war and torture enabler.

  • on a comment on delete over 5 years ago

    That's the important point here: the RNC is spending this money.  Hyprocrisy-style attacts about Republican FisCons wasting money and blahblah are not helpful here.  It's also as irrelevant policy-wise as John Edwards' haircuts.

    The value of this story is as a demoralizer for Republican donors.  Circulating the story is good, but using it to attack Palin is unnecessary and possibly counter-productive, as it could produce a backlash with a meme like "Obama supporters are against moms who try to look nice".

    Corporate Cons are already worried that McCain may have made a major gaffe picking Palin.  The key to the DNC outraising the RNC in 2010 may be gently peddling more stories like this.

  • I like conflict too :)

    Which is why I like to call out Denny when appropriate (which is most of the time).  I'm trying to warn newer commenters about his frequenty trollish goobledygook.

  • on a comment on Are the PUMA's with us? over 5 years ago

    I can only assume your a mindless partisan who thinks anyone who says something nice about HRC has her best interests at heart, and that Republicans use a variety of means of trolling.

  • on a comment on Are the PUMA's with us? over 5 years ago

    Funny, mabye.  Saw little evidence of that and it's not an important criterion for me anyway.  I find McCain to be one of if not the funniest Senator anyway.

    I recognized the "blind ambition" meme as a bit of a media/SNL exaggeration.  But I am not a fan of using "in it to win it" as a campaign slogan.  She showed she could be gracious after dropping out; more so than Bill anyway.

    I find her claims of experience "fighting for" this or that to be greatly exaggerated.  She blew it on the most important things (healthcare, Iraq) and always seemed more interested in getting the credit than forging the consensus or improving the bill.

    Charismatic?  Never met her in person, but I find HRC to be one of the least charismatic politicians I know.  What many people call her "shrill" voice simply sounds like nerves and shallow breathing caused by a lack of confidence in what she's saying.  Which I found to be mostly focus group-tested pablum anyway.  I'd rather listen to pretty much any other Democrat speak.

    Anyhoo, apologies for reopining old wounds.  My main point is that despite all that, she's a good Democrat and I would have voted for her.

    Didn't know that about Tipper...

  • I can look at the glass and see it as half full or half empty, depending on the circumstances.  Do you begrudge this?

    See?  More incoherent babbling.  You'd get a lot more respect posting as an honest McCain supporter than playing this stupid little game.
  • on a comment on Are the PUMA's with us? over 5 years ago

    How long did it take you to realize the pettiness?

    I will admit I have a pronounced personal dislike for Hillary Clinton.  But her policies are fine and I don't see how even the nastiest comments from a Clinton could make me vote for McCain if she had won the nomination.


Advertise Blogads