I think it's becoming clear that Jerome doesn't even take himself seriously anymore. He doesn't bother to read the comments which point out either the outright lies or idiocy in his comments.
This was particularly clear a few days ago when, after he called a McCain 8-point polling lead a "double digit" lead over Obama, a chorus of people pointed out the idiocy of this comment. He didn't even both responding or correcting it.
Basically, he just drops a pile of garbage on the front page, cashes his check from the Clinton campaign, and moves on. He doesn't really care about the dialogue any more.
I am amazed that the Clinton campaign doesn't see that this popular vote argument, in which they can tell each other until they are blue in the face that they won the popular vote and that Obama should get zero votes in Michigan, is having zero effect on the only relevant audience -- the superdelegates.
The superdelegates as a group actually have some understanding of votes and of history. Thus, none of them are falling for the argument that Jerome continues to repeat, about how the votes of Michigan and Florida should count in full regardless of what the DNC made absolutely clear to them would happen if they broke the rules.
Just look at how many superdelegates have come to Hilary in the last couple months. Other than add-ons, she has a net gain of just about zero.
The spin isn't working, Jerome. Zero effect, whatsoever, with the audience that really matters now. They're a whole lot smarter than you are giving them credit for.
You think an "anti-corporate" attitude is exactly what we need from an Attorney General? That's like saying you want an "anti-defendant" attitude in criminal trials. What we should look for in our prosecutors and should be an even-handed approach to people and corporations, not a bias one way or another.
Of course, John Edwards is a brilliant man and fully realizes this, so I would be thrilled to have him as our Attorney General.
Reading these recent posts, it seems clear that Jerome probably realizes that his 15 minutes of being taken seriously in the Democratic party are about to expire. So it appears that he is trying to re-frame himself as an amateur-hour version of Ann Coulter -- someone who tries to get attention, and make money, by making the most outrageous out-of-the-ballpark assertions that he can. Because attention leads to web hits, or book sales, or whatever.
And, in the short term, he is being successful in this measure -- a lot of people stop to read this blog to see the latest ludicrous statement Jerome is making, followed by the inevitable demolishing of his arguments by writers actually basing their comments on the facts. It's the same phenomenon as as a lot of people who stop to look at a car crash. I expect that he will not be very successful in this regard after Hillary is out of the race -- a "pundit" who is both anti-Obama and anti-McCain really will have a dimishing audience in the general election.
From this Feb. 29 Washington Post article, it seems clear that the Clinton campaign sees Jerome as an avenue for their message, and does pay for advertising. A campaign's payment of advertising dollars to a blogger (which, unlike a newspaper, doesn't have a clear distinction between its editorial group and its business operation) raises questions about whether a blogger is a sort of journalist or rather just an extension of a campaign.
From Washington Post, 2/29/08:
"Jerome Armstrong, founder of the blog MyDD and one of the few liberal bloggers who are supporting Clinton, said [Clinton campaign fundraiser Peter] Daou contacted him early this month about the campaign's desire to seed an online fundraising surge. Daou, who regularly reaches out to bloggers, has advertised on Armstrong's blog."
"'Most people who are Hillary supporters didn't know she needed money. The thinking out there was that she had the money,' said Armstrong, who served as an online strategist in Howard Dean's campaign in 2004. 'Once her supporters saw the signs that Hillary needed money, it activated them. . . . In any sort of online fundraising, you need an emotional pull with the person that you've given money to.'"
As a Jewish voter, I can assure you that a significant majority of Jewish voters will answer the phone on Passover. Among the small number that may not do so, most of these wouldn't have answered the phone on any other Friday evening or Saturday.
Actually, it would be closer to 75% of the remaining supers that she would have to convince. Given her inability to convince more than a tiny handful of superdelegates to come her way in the last 3 months, that's a rather implausible premise.
Let's see - if he does the same in the remaining primaries as he did in the Texas primary (4 point loss), he will win the nomination with quite a healthy delegate margin, given his long string of 20-30 point margins in early states.
But of course, he will actually win some of these primaries, creating an even larger delegate margin.
Of course DTaylor won't show his math. No one who makes those assertions ever shows the math, because the math would disprove their assertion. They somehow believe that people will be stupid enough to take these wild assertions at face value.
Just ignore any post that does not document how the writer got to the number.
Obama has a shot at Texas for the same reason that McCain does not have a shot at California. Immigration. It is a bigger issue than most people realize right now. The Republican line on immigration is alienating a lot of swing voters. McCain realizes it, but he hasn't been able to do much about it within the Republican party.