Not a naked opportunist--just a guy who trims a bit more avidly than his reputation or gooey-kneed media admirers would suggest. If an independent voter is torn between the two but leaning McCain because he's Mr. Straight Talk, then the Democrats get the message out that McCain wavers too, that might pull the indy back.

But really the Democrats this year will run against the Bush record. And it'll be tough for even them to screw that up. McCain will be presented mostly as a good guy who's unacceptable simply for favoring continuation of the Duhciderer's policies.

(Which is mostly how I see him, so it's possible I'm overgeneralizing from my one-man sample. Beats working though.)

And I liked the "Three years in the Senate" line myself. The Obama ones were all pretty funny, I thought.

This might not be so good...

Dick Morris calls the race for Obama

Just got a Huckabee robo call. He's promising a constitutional amendment to give DC the right to vote.

Mike, I don't think we want that. We're Republicans in DC.

dajafi wrote:This might not be so good...

Dick Morris calls the race for Obama

Not sure where he gets "including likely victories in Pennsylvania"; Clinton had a 20-point lead in the Keystone poll as of 1/14/08. Granted that IS down from 33-points in Nov 07 and 28-points in Dec 07 but to say likely victory is probably a stretch. I think it will be closer than 20-points but I still think Clinton takes PA in the 10-point range.

The real point is that if Obama does what is expected between now and the 19th and stays close in Texas and Ohio, Clinton is in big trouble. If Obama wins one of those two it is over.

traderdave wrote:

dajafi wrote:This might not be so good...

Dick Morris calls the race for Obama

Not sure where he gets "including likely victories in Pennsylvania"; Clinton had a 20-point lead in the Keystone poll as of 1/14/08. Granted that IS down from 33-points in Nov 07 and 28-points in Dec 07 but to say likely victory is probably a stretch. I think it will be closer than 20-points but I still think Clinton takes PA in the 10-point range.

The real point is that if Obama does what is expected between now and the 19th and stays close in Texas and Ohio, Clinton is in big trouble. If Obama wins one of those two it is over.

Re: Where he gets including likely victories in Pennsylvania...It's Dick Morris. He just makes up whatever he wants to fit in with whatever sells his latest storyline.

Re: If Obama wins one of Ohio or Texas it is over...Why? I mean, I guess if Hillary gets pummeled between now and then she probably needs to win both. But how many delegates are up for grabs between now and then, 300? If she loses those 180-120, she's within a shout of him going into Texas and Ohio. A draw can make her "the comeback kid" and then she has a reason to fight on through PA.

dajafi wrote:McCain's three little words: "A Hundred Years"

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gwqEneBKUs[/youtube]

I can't wait till McCain comes up with a reason to bomb Vietnam.

jerseyhoya wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:I just like how Bush was a bad guy for leading the country into war without being honest about the difficulties that laid ahead, and now in that video McCain's a bad guy for being up front about it.

Negative/contrast spots might ding McCain with independents or soft Dems or soft Republicans who like the image McCain has but don't necessarily know his issue stances. But they might also serve to galvanize GOP support in a way that doesn't usually happen, because we aren't going to be able to generate the same sort of anger about Obama as we could for Clinton and McCain has a base problem.

You mean liberals are going to point out that McCain's conservative, and that will get conservatives to like him more?

It's the ability to make observations like that except twice as wordy that make me hopeful I'll make the big bucks someday.

But seriously, negative ads most of the time are intended to persuade converts or drive down turnout for the opposition. It's not often that they would end up stimulating turnout on the other side.

I think it is to drive up your own base. Especially something like this. Sit at home and expect us to stay in war. It is fear mongering the fear mongerers. I like it.

dajafi wrote:But really the Democrats this year will run against the Bush record. And it'll be tough for even them to screw that up. McCain will be presented mostly as a good guy who's unacceptable simply for favoring continuation of the Duhciderer's policies.

There aren't that many of Bush's policies McCain wants to continue. Obama can get up there and say that he opposed the war from the start. That's cool. McCain was one of the few people who was critical of how the war was being run from the start.

Are the Democrats going to really say that "if you elect McCain you'll be continuing the policy of torture and Guantanamo?" How about "electing McCain will continue Bush's policies on the environment?" or "he'll continue Bush's push to drill in ANWR?"

How can you run against Bush when McCain disagrees with Bush more than he agrees with him? He does agree with Bush on immigration. I suppose the Democratic party could betray it's principles and come out anti-immigrant. Of course their own son of an immigrant candidate will probably be more liberal on the issue than McCain is.

There are a lot of people on here that know a lot more about politics than I do, but many of you guys seem to stop your idea of Republicans in that they are all a group of Bush disciples. The right wing has continually attacked McCain with criticism far more scathing than the Democrats would ever use. And it's only gotten worse since McCain pulled out to a big lead. These people won't line up behind McCain. Some of them seriously think McCain is more liberal than Hilary. On election night, Fox News read an e-mail saying, "I hate McCain. He has such disdain for us that he doesn't even pretend to agree with us."

Painting McCain as someone who will continue Bush's policies should fail because he won't be continuing most of his policies.

I was watching PJ O'Rourke on "Bill Maher." He said he had spoken to a lot of conservative business leaders and these people aren't lining up behind Rush and like McCain. What's going on here is a war within the Republican party. The McCainiacs have been quiet for a long while and won't want to give in. The so-called base is not a group that admits defeat. The Democrats' biggest asset in the election might actually be that McCain isn't Bush and many Republicans will stay home.

dajafi wrote:This might not be so good...

Dick Morris calls the race for Obama

Doesn't Morris hate the Clintons?

Phan In Phlorida wrote:

dajafi wrote:This might not be so good...

Dick Morris calls the race for Obama

Doesn't Morris hate the Clintons?

He does, ever since he stopped working for them. He's written at least one book that boils down to "HILLARY IZ IKKY." Ironically, I think it was her who brought Morris into the White House after the '94 midterm wipeout.

Hillary Clinton: full to bursting with crap

Hillary Clinton on Monday explained away Barack Obama's clean sweep of the weekend's caucuses and primaries as a product of a caucus system that favors "activists" and, in the case of the Louisiana primary, an energized African-American community.
...
She also downplayed many of Obama's Super Tuesday victories, describing them as states that Democrats should not expect to win in November.

"It is highly unlikely we will win Alaska or North Dakota or Idaho or Nebraska," she said, naming several of Obama's red state wins. "But we have to win Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, California, Arizona, New Mexico, Florida, Michigan … And we've got to be competitive in places like Texas, Missouri and Oklahoma."

Right, because Texas and Oklahoma are real swing states there. And who won Missouri last week?

Every time I find myself starting to think she might not be so bad, Clinton or one of her spokesweasels comes out and makes some blatantly insulting ("Obama's whole campaign is predicated on a speech he gave in 2002") or so-stupid-it's-insulting statement like this one, and I remember that these people, for all their smarts and good policy instincts, essentially just suck.

Well, I don't mean to sound insulting, but isn't Obama's campaign built around his speaking abilities? What else does he have going for him?

Houshphandzadeh wrote:Well, I don't mean to sound insulting, but isn't Obama's campaign built around his speaking abilities? What else does he have going for him?

Change?

dajafi wrote:McCain's three little words: "A Hundred Years"

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gwqEneBKUs[/youtube]

I despise John McCain but this is some seriously jive performance art.

Houshphandzadeh wrote:Well, I don't mean to sound insulting, but isn't Obama's campaign built around his speaking abilities? What else does he have going for him?

Here's the positive (i.e. nothing to do with the Clintons) case for Obama as I see it, not including his good record on issues from nuclear non-proliferation to ethics reform and my general preference for his non-coercive progressivism to Clinton's state-centric policy solutions:

–He broadens not just “the electorate,” but the engaged public. People seem to believe in this man, and it doesn’t seem to be the sort of infatuation that fades after a short time–this has been true since he first appeared on the national stage in '04. That kind of sustained engagement has the potential to reinvigorate citizen democracy, particularly considering that his core message is that this is about us: “We are the change we’ve been waiting for.”

–Obama’s background and experience-–as a “child of the world” (that sounds cheesy, but hopefully you get my meaning), a community organizer in low-income areas wrecked by macroeconomic transformation, a professor of constitutional law, and a consensus-building legislator willing to take on politically contentious issues like the videotaping of crime suspects–-strikes me as particularly well-suited for the challenges of this time.

–His foreign policy instincts, based on the Iraq decision, seem to be pretty good--but he’s no reflexive pacifist, as indicated by his comments about going into Pakistan to get bin Laden.

–While electing any Democrat would sort of do the trick, the sum total of this man’s background, political appeal and inclusive vision of transparent and responsive governance might be the strongest possible repudiation of George W. Bush in particular and the hyper-partisan, money- and interest-driven politics of the post-Reagan Republicans in general.

FlightRisk wrote:
I despise John McCain but this is some seriously jive performance art.

Despise? Why do you despise him?

I'm convinced.

I mean, I already was, but I do have some reservations about his short career in government, but then I guess I have reservations about how important that is. Something about the situation just strikes me as a little Carcetti-like, you know? Like Obama might be striking while the iron is hot even though he's not quite ready. I guess I'm just not as in love with him as some are, although he is my candidate of choice at this point.

Disco Stu wrote:

FlightRisk wrote:I despise John McCain but this is some seriously jive performance art.

Despise? Why do you despise him?

Toss a rock and you'll hit a news source covering why conservatives find him an undesirable nominee.

Beyond that I dislike his sweaty palmed determination to be President. I don't see him as a man of vision or principal. At best he's a survivor (literally and figuratively). He fails to inspire my trust and he succeeds at repelling my admiration.

On the other hand, I like Obama in spite of disagreeing with him on virtually every position.

So it's all personal when it comes to judging, "the man".

Houshphandzadeh wrote:
I'm convinced.

I mean, I already was, but I do have some reservations about his short career in government, but then I guess I have reservations about how important that is. Something about the situation just strikes me as a little Carcetti-like, you know? Like Obama might be striking while the iron is hot even though he's not quite ready. I guess I'm just not as in love with him as some are, although he is my candidate of choice at this point.

It cracks me up how the Clintons bring up the whole experience thing. Bill had 8 years as governor of Arkansas. That's about the same as being the mayor of Philly. So, you ready to elect John Street President?

I'm voting in eight hours. It's funny/weird that I work in politics but haven't voted in almost three years.

BTW, how do Republicans get 16 delegates from DC? How many people will vote in this? I might get like .01 delegate just for my vote. Heh.