Didn't Bloomberg become a Republican just to clear the primaries in NYC? He's essentially a liberal who has supported higher taxes on his Wall Street buddies and the best green reform agenda in any big city in America. I am willing to listen to contrary arguments. I just don't understand dismissing him out of hand and certainly not rejecting the entire ticket because of him.
Is there a policy objection to Mike Bloomberg that makes him an unacceptable Democrat? As far as I know he is pro-choice, pro-health care, and has proven willing to impose tax increases to expand services. He is certainly seems more acceptable than John Kerry almost v.p. nom., John McCain.
Are you suggesting a pro-Clinton bias at MyDD? Shocking! But seriously this is one of the last bastions of pro-Hillary support on the web. Hopefully tomorrow ends this thing and we can see a respite in the animosity towards the man who is in all likelihood to be the Democratic nominee.
There has been a slight up tick in Hillary Clinton's polling in almost every survey that includes a weekend sample. I believe this has been true of most every race so far. I would be shocked if the numbers didn't show tightening tomorrow and given Obama's momentum it is likely they might even show some additional strengthening on his part relative to the pre-weekend polls.
This is delusional. The truth of the matter is what we're seeing is that Hillary's maxed out her $2300 donors. To say that Obama's strength is coming on the backs of wealthy voters is in direct contradiction to the evidence right in front of you.
Barack Obama was asked specifically about his war stance vis-a-vis Kerry-Edwards and what your saying is that he should have blasted our nominees during the convention. Either you're being naive or cynically disingenuous .
Oh. I figured it out. It must be because Edwards supporters will recommend even the thinnest of diaries if it is about their candidate. I'm all for enthusiasm but seriously, how about a tiny bit of discretion. Are we seriously going to see a rec'd diary about every barely relevant endorsement and/or slight that John Edwards receives through out the entire campaign.
Republicans can accomplish their goals, the deconstruction of the federal government, by creating pervasive cynicism in the public. For liberals, who seek to use the government to make people's lives better, it requires inspiration. That is why it is not enough for Democrats to play the same game as Republicans only better. We have to change the game entirely.
The thing is that Bush has all the money he needs to carry out his escalation in the short term. Republicans made sure of that when they managed to make the Defence budget one of the few things they were able to get done on time in the 109th Congress. The fight will come in 6-8 months when he runs out of money and has to beg Congress for a supplemental, which we I am sure we can all agree that Congress should absolutely reject.
The Defence Buudget for f/y 2007 was one of the 2 out of 13 spending bills the Republican congress was able to get passed. The only way for congress to do anything sbout that is to pass a bill to sequester the money which Bush would just veto. The Boland Amendment was part of the budget, not suplemental to it and therefore much easier to pass.
Agreed that it may sound weaker, but it is almost certainly more honest. I truly believe that Reid and Pelosi are promising a lot more than they can achieve and that the result will be a disappointed and disaffected American people. The truth is that all the president has to do send more troops to Iraq is ring up the Pentagon and give them the order and in the short term there isn't a damned thing we can do about it.