• comment on a post Feingold: Incompetent campaign? over 3 years ago

    I think the big mistake he made was going negative instead, as in this year, that just makes him look like any other politician.

    Agreed, they need to just focus on what Russ has done that's really terrific. Sadly, the meida he has being done this cycle thus far is very bland.

  • on a comment on TARP propaganda over 3 years ago

    Superficial?  Yes, make some calls to help out Russ, thanks. Then come tell please.

  • on a comment on TARP propaganda over 3 years ago

    Booman is a dude.

  • on a comment on Can You Stand the Rain? over 3 years ago

    lol, that was a great visual there at the shopping mall.

  • on a comment on The pundits say... over 3 years ago

    You are correct, I even blogged that recently-- should have said from last century. However, I think most put the economy on blame, they had a mini depression, for the loss. I'd like to read more about the era.

  • on a comment on 5 weeks over 3 years ago

    I think he may see the writing on the wall. There's a chance of that happening esp with the Clinton whispers happening.

  • on a comment on The pundits say... over 3 years ago

    That's bizzare, so he doesn't believe his own numbers. I actually think he's probably about right there at 50-55.

  • on a comment on People vs Corporations over 3 years ago

    That'd be real interesing, given that the recent extreme divide of partisanship is... recent.

  • on a comment on Whiners over 3 years ago

    This is delusionary, please grow up. Obama and Clinton were both DLC candidates, whatever that means.

  • on a comment on Whiners over 3 years ago

    reminds me of Bill "The Butcher" in gangs of ny

  • on a comment on Pew polls over 3 years ago

    I got into that with Bowers a bit at the AMP summit-- believe its on YouTube if you want to follow up. Basically, he agreed, that its really only a 2% differential with regards to the matter the economy and approval ratings, and the idea that its entirely about the economy (Obama's decline) has no factual basis beyond that number.

    Anyone who's looked at Presidential approval for the last 6 Presidents, realizes that the matter of hyper-partisanship entirely dismisses the apples to apples comparison. Really, the only comparison that equates for Obama is the second term of GW Bush. Anything previous, and you are on apples to oranges comparison terms, given the extreme nature of the recently developed partisan divide.

    I've gotten to the point where I dismiss out of hand as blissfully unaware anyone that brings up this sort of hopola of comparing Obama with Reagan, but I digress ocasionally and provide pointers too...


  • on a comment on Obama the neo-con over 3 years ago

    I'm gonna follow up on this, because it really pissed me off as I reflected on the time. You have no idea how much I was pushing Warner from the progressive side from inside his PAC-future campaign. One of the main reasons I went to work for him was because he didn't carry the baggage of voting for Iraq, and when I'd asked him about it at the get-go, he replied, 'what a big f'ing mistake'. In fact, I'd garner my framing of where he needed to go to win the nomination (anti-war, tar'n Clinton) probably ultimately contributed to his rationale for staying out of the race. And that was fine by me, its not like, with two young kids, I was itching to lose a couple of years of my life inside a 24/7 campaign. Which is exactly why, instead of going to work for Clinton or Obama or any of the others in 2006, after Warner dropped out, I choose to go work for Kerry, and help him with the anti-war effort in the Senate.

    Kerry, you'll recall, had an up-down vote on setting a deadline for getting troops out of Iraq that failed in early 2006. It got 11 votes. I set out with his small team to change that equation with setadeadline.com and his large army of a list and his Senate staff. That's what I spent 2007 doing, and pushing for it to become the stance of the Democratic party, and it happend. Then in 2008, worked as a part of 11 Senate winning Senate campaigns, and helping Polis win the open CO House seat. That's what I remember working on in 2008.

    But for anon asshats like you, it's all about Clinton vs Obama still.

    One regret I certainly have is engaging the assholes here like you throughout 2008 and onward. You can have your fucking shiny Obama object for all I care.

  • comment on a post What’s Up With Germany? over 3 years ago

    are very big in Germany now. And no longer a rump for the social democrats either. I'm not saying they are the only reason, but they are a major political force now in the country.

  • on a comment on Obama the neo-con over 3 years ago

    You obviously don't read the site, but just pretend too. I stated all the time that Obama was no different than Clinton, except that the latter was partisan. I backed neither of them, abhored them both over their votes to support the war.

    Until I had to choose. And then on whom I thought would be best to:

    1) Be partisan

    2) respond to pressure in the progressive base

    Style?  OK, we agree. When I realized the Dems would win big in '06 and '08, I wanted a partisan progressive, and backed Edwards fwiw. Obama I knew as faking it based on their very good polling (obvious to a hack like myself).

    Hell, the entire Democratic political establishment, of which Obama and your chosen candidates are a part of, looks at their base as a burden.

    I agree, which is why I have come to abhor the Democratic Political Establishment, of which I am sure you are a part. I'm ready for a revolution in this country that throws out the establishment of both parties.

    What's disingenuous is the likening whomever I happened to work for as a political client to what my views are. So, since I worked for about 40 of them, I share all their views?  Of course, that is nonsense.

    If I was bitter over anything, it would be that the guys that led Obama's campaign, and on whom Markos and every other hopemonger jumped aboard, Gibbs, Axelrod, Plouffe, were exactly the guys who were trashing what we were building with Dean in 2003. Gibbs, then with Kerry, was certainly the worst. Plouffe was so lost with Gephardt in Iowa but then instituted the murder-suicide. Or Axelrod, whom I got a major laugh out of seeing him morph Edwards into the Change for America candidate in Iowa.

    Now, see those are some smart hacks. They learned how they were getting their ass kicked, so when they latched onto Obama, they knew what to engineer. But whats to be bitter about; its nothing but an interesting history.

    Obama is a terrible President. Way worse than I ever imagined. He's a disaster for the Democratic Party.

    I'm disappointed.

    That's a step, iirc the 2nd or soemthing?

  • on a comment on Obama the neo-con over 3 years ago

    Its very surprising, given that Obama is a constitutional expert. There's nothing to indicate in his campaign that he would carry on this way; in fact, just the opposite.


Advertise Blogads