First Dem debate

[blacbird]

I didn't watch it, and Internet polls are notorious for having skewed results (the sampled population being anything but a statistically valid population representation), but intriguiging poll results, all the same:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18335732?GT1=9246

(Figuring it didn't mean much in the overall totals, I cast meaningless votes for Kucinich, just to see the results).

caw

[SpookyWriter]

Dem bones...dem bones...

[blacbird]

Oh, man. Moments ago, watching a discussion about this debate on Hardball, Joe Scarborough (yes, that Joe Scarborough, former Republican Congressman from Florida, elected in the 1994 Gingrich Revolution, and without question, a conservative's conservative), made a key point that the Democrats, in general, are united, and for the first time in a very long time, the Republicans are anything but. He made another point, that Democrats are pretty satisfied with their field of declared candidates, and Republicans are not. Asked by Chris Matthews why that was, he said: “George Bush, over the last seven years, has done more to damage the Republican Party than any Democrat could ever do.”

A lot explained, from a conservative Republican and a very smart guy, who knows the difference between reality-based analysis and wishful thinking.

The sad part of this is, we're rolling into an election that increasingly is shaping up as a referendum on a failed Presidency, and not on the kinds of issues we face as a nation. I'm not entirely confident that kind of mindset in the American voting public is going to give us the best person to be the next President of the United States.

The happy part of it is, given the group of serious contenders for the Presidency in both major parties, it will be a significant improvement, regardless who becomes the next President of the United States.

caw

[SpookyWriter]

"failed Presidency??" GW's term in office was a resounding success. He bolstered the economy by building up the militarism apparatus which created more jobs; which increased the buy power of people who would normally be inclined to menial jobs, and helped launch the most successful military-to-civilian monetary gain since Vietnam.

I love this guy. Ever since he declared war on Iraq the economy has boomed. Why? Hmmm...isn't there a obscure economy theory about this subject?

The dems don't stand a chance. Bush was the best thing to our economy since LBJ. I want another war just to make sure our military driven economy is able to support my goals until retirement.

[McDuff]

Bush was the greatest president of Cloud Cuckoo Land the world has ever seen.

Anyway, I haven't seen the debates yet, but can I just say I've been a Bill Richardson fan since 2003, and I'm sticking with my guns so far.

[SpookyWriter]

Bush was the greatest president of Cloud Cuckoo Land the world has ever seen.

Anyway, I haven't seen the debates yet, but can I just say I've been a Bill Richardson fan since 2003, and I'm sticking with my guns so far.But you're a Brit. What interest is Bill Richardson to you?

[maestrowork]

We should select Bush for the third time.

[SpookyWriter]

We should select Bush for the third time.Why not just breed ten generations of Bushes? I think we're on to the genetic equivalent of Caesar.

[Joe270]

Right, Maestro, why switch things up and confuse everyone. Right now, everyone, save a precious few, stand absolutely certain of their views.

It's rare to have that. Why waste it? Re-electing Bush might be comforting to all.

Why get everything all muddied up again?

[WarrenP]

... made a key point that the Democrats, in general, are united, and for the first time in a very long time, the Republicans are anything but...

The sad part of this is, we're rolling into an election that increasingly is shaping up as a referendum on a failed Presidency, and not on the kinds of issues we face as a nation...



I would disagre, in that I don't think the Dems are united other than their discontent for Bush and anything he is tied to. Many of the new Dems elected in the last cycle were pretty conservative (by Dem party standards), and even now, Hillary is slammed by the anti-war left when she goes to speak.

No argument that the Repubs are divided, I think they have no clue where to head right now.

I also agree that this election is aimed, thus far, as about Bush, which is pretty sad. He isn't running for anything anymore. Hey new guy: tell me what you're going to do, and how you're going to do it. I already know that every Dem candidate thinks Bush has failed at everything... so what? What are you going to do now, that's what I want to know.

Same questions to the Repub side, I already know that they are going to try to walk the line of not critizing the President, while distancing themselves from him, again... so what? Tell me what your plan is for all the issues we face.

[robeiae]

I don't think Scarborough is right about the dems in the least. The dems are not united (though neither are the repubs). I'm not sure where he gets that from, but I don't see it at all.

[TheGaffer]

I also agree that this election is aimed, thus far, as about Bush, which is pretty sad.

Attacking the last guy is a pretty time-honored tradition. In the case of this president, however, there's a sense that it's also a reckoning with all the damage that's been done over the last few years, and the fact that the GOP wants to continue to deny this reality (particularly Bush, Cheney et. al), bringing this up again and again will eventually force a GOP candidate to need to repudiate or fully support the policies of this administration.

So far, most of them are punting on this -- the one who is embracing it most fully, John McCain, looks dead in the water as a result. This isn't like attacking the Ford Presidency. There's a lot that has to be dealt with here as a serious issue, and to ignore it is just ridiculous. Sure, we have to look forward to the future, but to fail to recognize current reality (as the Washington punditocracy and the leading figures in the GOP continue to do) would be a serious disqualifier, IMHO, which eliminates McCain, Guiliani and Romney.

And Blackie, while I agree that it's going to be hard to repeat this disaster, no matter who is elected, a Rudy presidency would come the closest, IMHO.

[Joe270]

Anyone else interested in an ultimate fighting style cage match between Cheney and Kucinich?

[TheGaffer]

I'd prefer one using Senator Robert Byrd and Senator Ted Stevens.

[billythrilly7th]

Way to win it, Barack!!

Way to stink as usual, Hillary.

Nice hair, John.

Nice joke, Joe.

End Thrilly Debate Wrap Up

[RumpleTumbler]

I missed the debate. Did Hillary speak in Spanish with English subtitles?

[blacbird]

For the record, Scarborough didn't exactly say Democrats were united. Just that they were less in disarray than Republicans seem to be right now. He's not happy about that, but he's intellectually honest enough to separate wishful thinking from objective analysis.

caw

[TheGaffer]

For the record, Scarborough didn't exactly say Democrats were united. Just that they were less in disarray than Republicans seem to be right now. He's not happy about that, but he's intellectually honest enough to separate wishful thinking from objective analysis.

caw

It's refreshing to see; most commentators on the right are Bush sycophants right now. Pat Buchanan is an exception as well, as is Bob Barr. Politically I think they're both nuts, but there is something to be said for standing on principle. Of course, this is why none of the above are actually in politics now.

[McDuff]

I missed the debate. Did Hillary speak in Spanish with English subtitles?

Oh, yeah! Because of the Mexican thing*! And because she hates English people! And because nobody's reminded us we need to fear the Brown Swarm today! Man, that political commentary is so incisive and thoughtful!

Are you running for office too? Because with a political mind that damn sharp, you're wasted on the internet.


*THERE'S A COUNTRY TO THE SOUTH OF THE USA CALLED MEXICO! PEOPLE THERE SPEAK SPANISH! SOME OF THEM CROSS THE BORDER AND GET JOBS! THIS IS BAD! AAAAGH!

[RumpleTumbler]

Oh, yeah! Because of the Mexican thing*! And because she hates English people! And because nobody's reminded us we need to fear the Brown Swarm today! Man, that political commentary is so incisive and thoughtful!

Are you running for office too? Because with a political mind that damn sharp, you're wasted on the internet.


*THERE'S A COUNTRY TO THE SOUTH OF THE USA CALLED MEXICO! PEOPLE THERE SPEAK SPANISH! SOME OF THEM CROSS THE BORDER AND GET JOBS! THIS IS BAD! AAAAGH!

The brown swarm? :roll:

[Joe270]

Check this out: http://www.votepetrelli.com/

The Vote Petrelli/Colbert bumpersticker will be everywhere for the next year.

Can a fictional character get elected?

[McDuff]

Come on, we weren't supposed to mock that comment? Was it supposed to be serious?

[McDuff]

Is Nathan Petrelli a Democrat or a Republican? It's never mentioned...

[Joe270]

He's a hero, that means he's republican.:roll:

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

[SC Harrison]

Anyway, I haven't seen the debates yet, but can I just say I've been a Bill Richardson fan since 2003, and I'm sticking with my guns so far.

I don't know, man. I only caught a few minutes towards the end of the broadcast, but it was just in time to see Richardson answer the question, "What would you do the first day in the White House?" with:

"The first day, I would pull all our troops out of Iraq. The second day, I would present Congress with a comprehensive economic package to get this country on the right track. The third day, I would change all the water fountains over to Cherry Coke."

Alright, alright. I made up that last part as a tribute to my sixth-grade student council election campaign, which was a dismal failure. Which was actually a relief, since I had absolutely no idea how the water fountain conversion process would actually take place, who would pay for said conversion, how to keep people from getting bubbles up their nose, etc.

[blacbird]

It's refreshing to see; most commentators on the right are Bush sycophants right now. Pat Buchanan is an exception as well, as is Bob Barr. Politically I think they're both nuts, but there is something to be said for standing on principle. Of course, this is why none of the above are actually in politics now.

I agree entirely. Pat Buchanan, in particular, has become a much better human being since he abandoned his fantasy about becoming President of the United States. Given that there are these people out there on the Conserv end of the political bell curve, it makes you wonder why Fox News leans on sock monkeys like Hannity. Don't get me started on CNN's Glenn Beck.

But I regard Joe Scarborough as a pretty decent, intellectually honest and smart guy. Even when I disagree with his political views, which are pretty much all the time.

Incidentally, another aspect of the commentary about this South Carolina Dem debate that I saw was Keith Olbermann being pretty harsh on the Dem candidates in general, for skating around difficult issues. Attention, Righters, he's not anywhere near as knee-jerk as you seem to think. He just finds Bill O' insufferably pompous and arrogant, and Dubya a bumbling idjut, and it makes for good satire. Which puts him in the same tent as Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, who are now regarded by the younger crowd in this nation as the most trustworthy "news" commentators on TV.

caw

[Joe270]

Perhaps it's time to conscript our leaders. Those who want to be our leader are, by default, disqualified.

Then we pick someone. Tag, you're it.

All through college, every time I missed a meeting, I got elected to something. This method can't be worse than what we have.

[SpookyWriter]

Perhaps it's time to conscript our leaders. Those who want to be our leader are, by default, disqualified.

Then we pick someone. Tag, you're it.

All through college, every time I missed a meeting, I got elected to something. This method can't be worse than what we have.Nice concept. I prefer the method of superior thought and agility to avoid a sharp pointy object. We need leaders who aren't dwarfed by the midgets of impotency.

[Joe270]

dwarfed by the midgets of impotency.

Kucinich?

[SpookyWriter]

Kucinich?If I had an inch and a desire to procreate then yes, Kucinich is a reasonable choice.

[Joe270]

The visual impression of you bending that worm over and buggering . . . no, can't go there. My eyes! They're burning!

[robeiae]

...but there is something to be said for standing on principle. Of course, this is why none of the above are actually in politics now.Is that the same group you have Gingrich in? :D

If only Teddy K was a commentator standing on principle. Hey, I can dream, can't I?

[TheGaffer]

I agree entirely. Pat Buchanan, in particular, has become a much better human being since he abandoned his fantasy about becoming President of the United States. Given that there are these people out there on the Conserv end of the political bell curve, it makes you wonder why Fox News leans on sock monkeys like Hannity. Don't get me started on CNN's Glenn Beck.

Glenn Beck is Exhibit A of why the "librul media" charge is bunk. He's now appearing from time to time on Good Morning America, and he's an asshat of the highest order.

But I regard Joe Scarborough as a pretty decent, intellectually honest and smart guy. Even when I disagree with his political views, which are pretty much all the time.

Incidentally, another aspect of the commentary about this South Carolina Dem debate that I saw was Keith Olbermann being pretty harsh on the Dem candidates in general, for skating around difficult issues. Attention, Righters, he's not anywhere near as knee-jerk as you seem to think. He just finds Bill O' insufferably pompous and arrogant, and Dubya a bumbling idjut, and it makes for good satire. Which puts him in the same tent as Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert, who are now regarded by the younger crowd in this nation as the most trustworthy "news" commentators on TV.

caw


Olbermann isn't Colbert/Stewart. He's purporting to have a more serious news show, so I can't group them. He does seem to like making Bill O a punching bag, which is fine by me, but hopefully we will see some of him hammering the Dem candidates for various reasons. I would like to see him interview more of the GOP more often, as I think it would enhance his reputation as a journalist/commentator, because it would force him to ask tough questions to a person in front of him, rather than simply comment as he does. That's the one fault I find with Keith. A good journalist doesn't pull punches with either side (like Moyers, for example).

[TheGaffer]

Is that the same group you have Gingrich in? :D

If only Teddy K was a commentator standing on principle. Hey, I can dream, can't I?

Heh, whoops! No, Newt doesn't belong in that group, I say. ;)

As for Ted Kennedy, he's going to die in that Senate seat.

[SpookyWriter]

Heh, whoops! No, Newt doesn't belong in that group, I say. ;)

As for Ted Kennedy, he's going to die in that Senate seat.A slow death from what I understand. He has the worst case of hemorrhoids ever recorded by modern science. Wanna see pictures?

[Joe270]

If every candidate died from some campaign disease, donkey and elephant, and only Kucinich was left,

someone else would win. Why is this guy running?

I'd vote for the local homeless dude who sleeps in the oleanders down by the dumpsters next to the Albertsons before I'd vote for Kucinich.