• on a comment on Bad 2009 over 5 years ago

    You want to win and have the potential the United States defaults on it's debt, trashes the dollar and goes into hyperinflation?

  • comment on a post Bad 2009 over 5 years ago

    There is so much going on right now and we've been watching and writing up as much as we can.

    I want to point to two posts.

    The first, Take Action, is the actual text of the bill being proposed before Congress and it's outrageous.  It gives executive power with no further ability from Congress to intercede.  This bill must be stopped.

    The second post, What the Hell Just Happened? gives a very concise overview of the recent bail out timeline, with graphs, specifics but yet explains so a layperson can follow what the hell is going on here.

    This has been shock and awe, 2.0 folks and they are moving so quickly and hence the public cannot digest what they are really doing with their money!

    (EP is a new community blog site, like myDD but devoted to all things econ.   If money is involved, we're interested in looking at it.   We have a lot of people who post on DK, myDD and the Netroots sites writing on EP, simply working to get more focus on the real stuff.  Follow the money is our motto!)

  • Great Post, with lots of details on the coming financial conditions.  

    Folks I hope all appreciate someone taking the time to research out this information to point to some seriously bad news.

    I gotta point to midtowng (gjohnsit)'s blog, Obama isn't going to save you.  No, this is not an Obama bash blog post.  The title is pointing to a series of economic reports, focus on financials that imply really scary trouble coming at us.

    I'm pretty much of the theory of the dribble upon economy, where we continue this slide into decay but not some sort of major Economic Armageddon scenario.  This post and reading the links which are his references, scared the shit out of me.

  • comment on a post Greenwald: Uncritical Obama Devotion Is Destructive over 6 years ago

    I'm glad to see this because it isn't the person who is running that I thought was why everyone blogged but the fact they wanted real policy change that is in favor of working America, in the national interest and for the people.

  • comment on a post Some Montana & South Dakota Exit Polls over 6 years ago

    They are trying to get supers to switch right now to try to spin the media story to fairly ignore she has a blow out in SD, which is possible.  

  • comment on a post ARG New Polls for S.D. and Montana over 6 years ago

    no, this is buyer's remorse.  The Obama buzz is wearing off and now people are thinking about that person actually running the country.

    Good for MT, SD.  They are independent Western states.  It doesn't surprise me they are going to think for themselves.

  • comment on a post Kentucky (& NC) for Clinton over 6 years ago

    that is really surprising as well as quite damning on Obama.  I would have never expected that.

  • comment on a post Oregon Town Hall Meeting over 6 years ago

    If you want to volunteer to work the phones,


    I suspect it's going by your zip code so if you want to work the phones in Oregon, you need to pick an Oregon zip.

    This was extremely good actually, she hit it out of the ball park.

    I'm personally disgusted at the media blackout and it is a black out on Clinton.  Not a word on Bill and Chelsea's meetings in the local press.

    Further info:

    Registered voters in Oregon:

    http://blog.oregonlive.com/mapesonpoliti cs/2008/05/a_first_look_at_oregons_new_v o.html

    Number of turned in ballots as of Friday (29%)

    http://www.oregonvotes.org/may202008/cum .pdf

  • comment on a post Clinton's role over 6 years ago

    Another commentary on this overall process over on The Economic Populist and how policy and agenda is being drown like a dead cat.

    For all of you who actually research out policy, votes, legislation, the money behind legislation and so on, The Economic Populist is a community blog but a deep analysis, fact based blog. We write about the statistical details, facts on trade, economics, labor,subprime, CPI, inflation and so on, which currently are nowhere to be found on most major blogs.

  • They won't GOTV, hello, now are you so full of your cult that you cannot read a few basic sentences?

  • It's a well known fact they grabbed people out of universities and sent them to "Obama training camp"
    well before the 1st primary to organize and prophetalize on the campuses.
  • comment on a post Hillary Clinton Going All In In Kentucky over 6 years ago

    For one, there are a lot of new time voters in Oregon who are actually GOP and switched to vote in this primary.  

    Then, school let out.  Frankly the Obama campaign has used campuses beyond the pale but school is out.

    Finally, there are a lot of people undecided in OR, although the inability of these pollsters to understand people use cell phones today is another issue.  

    It's also a GOTV thing.  I believe only 29% of the ballots have been turned in.  Clinton should be out here, someway to get their voters to fill out those ballots and drop them off.

    he is there to get them to fill out ballots....the Clintons needs to do the same in a big, big way!

  • on a comment on Hillary Clinton conference call over 6 years ago

    Look, read it and if you have a statistically valid critique, by all means but that is not what he did in his analysis.

    The Obamamaniacs scare me because any sort of reality they attack if they don't like what that reality says.   Ya know, numbers are numbers, stats are stats, deal with it.

  • comment on a post Hillary Clinton conference call over 6 years ago

    I found something fairly amazing from American research yesterday:

    A Surprise About Obama, Clinton, and Turnout

    Conventional wisdom has it that Barack Obama's primary victories are based on his ability to increase turnout.

    A look at what happens when voter turnout increases in the primaries proves that this notion is wrong. In fact, Obama has had his greatest primary (and caucus) victories when turnouts have been low.

    Obama received 66% of the primary vote in Georgia when 22.7% of all registered voters in the state voted in the Democratic primary. In Virginia, Obama received 64% of the primary vote when 21.1% of all registered voters in the state voted in the Democratic primary. In Mississippi, Obama received 61% of the primary vote when 24.4% of all registered voters in the state voted in the Democratic primary.

    Hillary Clinton received 67% of the primary vote in West Virginia when 30.1% of all registered voters in the state voted in the Democratic primary. In Pennsylvania, Clinton received 55% of the vote when 27.7% of all registered voters in the state voted in the Democratic primary. In Ohio, Clinton received 54% of the primary vote when 30.5% of all registered voters in the state voted in the primary.

    There are exceptions (such as Arkansas, Tennessee, and Rhode Island), but Clinton, and not Obama, tends to win in the states where turnouts are higher. The relationship is strong enough that Democratic primary turnout can be predicted using Clinton's share of the vote.

    --Dick Bennett

    I'd say that's another argument in favor of Clinton and truly went against what I thought was the case.

  • on a comment on Hillary Clinton conference call over 6 years ago

    about not intimidating voters, about making sure everyone has a voice, free of influence, upon which to cast their vote?  As I recall, something about a campaign not using other resources, such as taxpayer funded universities to fuel their campaign?  

    So, which rules are you referring to, the ones that now favor Obama?


Advertise Blogads