Wright has been a far bigger story over the past couple of weeks than the gas tax holiday. Unfortunately, sensationalist stories such as that have more impact with low-information 'late deciders' than more wonkish topics like whose fuel cost relief plan is better.
A dedicated.. quarantine area for primary blogs would really help. I've stopped looking at the recced diaries altogether, now. It's not even Labor Day, and I'm already completely burned out on the '08 primary. This isn't a good thing, at all.
My own personal favorite candidate hasn't received a donation from me, and will not any time soon. It's too damn early. The more diaries I see pushing one candidate or sliming another, the more annoyed I get with the whole lot of them.
And MyDD has very much become presidential primary central. My main motivation for coming here was for insightful commentary on polling and other political wonkery (see: Chris Bowers). Now, even the front page is cluttered up with pro- and anti- candidate blogs.
I'm not sure what can be done about the situation that won't enter that dreaded 'censorship' territory. But I hope something can and will.
I think, perhaps, that part of the problem is that the new, flexible, online social networks are considered by people like Bishop to be 'virtual' - and that, to them, means 'not real'. Another good example of an atypical social network (and one that I, a classic Bishop-style 'social pariah' am an active member of) is video-gaming. While most people of Bishops generation and social clique consider gamers to be anti-social, in fact there is a great deal of social interaction among them. One of the gaming communities I'm active in, the Amazon Basin, has, on its general forums, a 'job search' sub-forum, dedicated to members helping other members of the community find jobs. While the common interest of the community is computer gaming, rather than a more accepted form of interaction like bowling or golf, the community fills many of the same roles - helping people with careers, helping them settle in (I've helped several of my friends from there move to or from my city), and even some political activism.
In short, I think the 'problem', if there is one, lies with the narrow, elitist world view of people like Bishop.
Wow, I don't really know what to say.
You're probably my second favorite blogger, behind only Hunter, dKOS's master of Snark. I've always loved your insightful analysis. I'm dissappointed that you're leaving MyDD, and that'll likely reduce the number of times per day that I refresh MyDD.com, but I'm glad to hear you're starting a new blog. I'll definitely read you there.
But Obama did snub the CBC when he bailed on their debate, didn't he?
Granted, they all but forced him to. But regardless, I'm not so sure snubbing the CBC is such a bad thing. After all, in adition to co-hosting the Faux News Debate, this is the same orginization that endorsed Jefferson in La-02 and, well, Al Wynn (the irony of quoting him in defense of a 'netroots candidate' is astounding). They've also opposed net neutrality. I'm frankly not a fan of the organization, as it currently stands.
In the wake of Dean and Iowa, I have a strong feeling of utter irrelevance in presidential primaries.
The only input I have, thanks to that front-loading, is via contributions - voting with my wallet, if you will.
It's not a good system, but unfortunately, it's the one we've got.
Good point about Obama not jumping on bandwagons. I'm not really critical of his not following the lead of others, but the fact that someone else did it first doesn't mean it's no longer the right thing to do.
My biggest problem remains his failure to lead on any of the recent issues - although I did very much appreciate his sharp response to Fox's Madrassa smear, that just made me more dissapointed that he failed to rapidly respond to the Fox debate.
Good point about Clark not being on the poll anymore.
The poll still shows an impressive gain for Edwards, though, any way you look at it. I doubt that Clarks support moved as a solid bloc into the Edwards camp, so it still looks like Obama is 'down'.
Re: the usefullness of a dkos straw poll: I consider it a fairly accurate measure of the opinions of a sizable section of the activist base of the democratic party. Nothing more, but certainly nothing less.
Take a look at the latest DKos Straw Poll. Edwards and Obama have historically been tied. As of my comment, Edwards is ahead by 14%, 40/26. That's not even close.
Honestly, I've steadily lost respect for Obama over the past months. He's been wishy-washy on a lot of things, and has failed to lead on anything. He missed a huge oppurtunity with the Fox News debate debacle - they've been his ardent enemies since day one, and yet he 'deliberated' what to do until it was too late. I think Edwards learned his lesson about 'deliberation' from the mess with the bloggers. He's been much more on the ball since then.
Just wrote in a letter to the editor of Time. I somehow doubt it'll get published, but... Perhaps it will induce a smidgen of editorial shame.
Please Hire Me
I don't have a journalism degree, or a political science degree, or, in fact, any relevant degree at all. But I am inarguably highly qualified for a position on your political journalism staff. The bar is aparently set quite low. Massimo Calabresi's recent article, "Bloggers on the Bus", contained three glaring errors in a single sentence: "In 2005, John Thune, the Democratic candidate for Senate in South Dakota, paid bloggers to attack supporters of his opponent, then Senate majority leader Tom Daschle."
a) it was 2003,
b) Thune is a Republican,
c) Tom Daschle was minority leader at the time.
Anyone with political knowledge would be well aware of these facts. Therefore, I can only conclude that political knowledge is not a requirement for employment.
Furthermore, the article repeats the fallacious claim that the Edwards Blogger, Marcotte, "had deleted her most controversial Duke comments". This was even admitted to be false by Michelle Malkin, the right-wing blogger who began the rumor. Anyone with journalism experience would have done enough research to discover that. Therefore, I can conclude that journalistic experience is not a requirement for employment.
So, I'm sure you will agree that I am highly qualified for a position at your orginazation. By default. Thanks for your kind consideration.
I'm a college student, but I've never been very interested in the college democrats. First of all, it seems like more of a social organization than a political one, and I'm not a particularly social person (I'm very shy, at least for the first 5 minutes after meeting someone). Second, I had a friend/classmate who was the ex-president of the college dems at her previous school, and she said she hadn't even entered the college dems at ours - she got utterly fed up with doing nothing besides acting as a photo-op prop behind whichever big name dem was in town that week. That basically confirmed suspicions and cynicisms I'd already developed. I was a youth vote campaigner in middle and high school, and I was very used to getting the 'oh-that's-a-nice-idea-but-you'll-learn'
dismissal. I didn't expect it to be any different in college, and my cynicism seemed to hold.
Now that Dean is in charge, I wouldn't be surprised if that's beggining to change. But I'd still rather work directly for a candidate, as I did for Congressman Miller last semester. Joining a general organization offers less control over how my time and money is spent. For much the same reason, I donated nothing to the DSCC/DCCC in the last cycle.
Thank you, congressman, for your take on the speech. I had the (mis)fortune to be dividing my time between the TV and the history essay I have due on Thursday (American expansionism in the early 1900s - Mark Twain has a pretty vicious rebuttal of imperialism that I'm using as the basis of my essay), so I only heard about a third of the speech.
In many respects, this speech was more boring than his previous ones. It lacked any bold policy initiatives - no defenstration of social security, no underfunded and unrealistic education mandate, no Mars Mission (one idea of the presidents that I fully support - if only he did). And, of course, nothing noteworthy on foreign policy or the war - just a brief reference to 'stay the course +20k'. It also lacked most of his usual.. wackiness. No 'manimals' this time. Just a little bit of product placement for Disney. I guess Path to 9/11 paid off, after all.
I did have the pleasure of listening to the entirety of Senator Webb's rebuttal. In about 8 minutes, Webb articulated a far more substantial vision of what the future of america can, and should, be than Bush even has, in any of his far more verbose speeches. And the only product he advertised was American bravery.