TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:He doesn't have any money.

Doesn't it kind of suck working for a candidate who doesn't have money? And shouldn't you be in Jersey knocking on doors or something to get the word out?

Houshphandzadeh wrote:I don't know much about Phil Gramm, but, "We're in a mental recession," sounds pretty spot-on to me.

karn wrote:They're going to blow by that last big number on the Dow for sure. 900 or 1000 point drop by closing time I predict

phdave wrote:

karn wrote:They're going to blow by that last big number on the Dow for sure. 900 or 1000 point drop by closing time I predict

Dow We only have a few more months until the Dow hits 30,000.

1 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars This book shows it's time for RATIONAL exuberance., September 5, 2002
By A Customer
This work is filled with facts that contradict an "overly pessimistic" mindset about equities that has infected the media and the whole investment arena. The author has effectively refocused attention to the big picture and the long term. The 22 myths that are examined and refuted plus the more than 100 charts and tables contain valuable information that every investor and financial advisor can use.

McCain is in trouble in Michigan for the same reason he is in trouble in GOP leaning Florida and North Carolina; when it come to strategy Team Obama is throwing the McCain High Command around the room like stunt men in a Bruce Lee picture. The terrain of the election has shifted mightily to economic fear and Obama is moving his campaign to exploit that. Meanwhile the McCain campaign retains its lamentable focus on press tactics at the expense of a real strategy. While Obama’s huge financial resources are an advantage, the vital issue for McCain is not cutting all Detroit TV spending to find money to increase a TV ad buy in Charlotte from 1700 rating points a week to 2600 rating points because Obama can afford 3800 rating points. What really counts is what message McCain is using his 1800 rating points to carry, and even more importantly what message McCain and Palin are out selling in the media every day. For the last nine weeks the McCain campaign has tried win by raising Obama’s negatives. Ads have attacked, McCain and Palin has have attacked. This has failed. Over the top negative attacks and a campaign message that too often seems to be little more than sarcasm and suppressed anger has damaged McCain’s priceless and hard earned “brand” as a different kind of Republican. McCain’s best option now is to ditch the chainsaw and offer a scared and angry country what it badly wants; hope and leadership.

Palin should drop the braying attacks on Obama’s aging hippie bomber pals and start connecting to her cherished hockey moms on the one issue they = are actually worried about; a quickly slowing economy. Chuck the hacky and ineffective negative ads and switch to man on the street spots with real people voicing their real doubts about Obama; too weak to stand up to Washington’s mighty special interest cartel or the newly empowered Democratic bosses of the Congress and Senate, too liberal to know how to fix the economy, too inexperienced to handle a dangerous world. On Tuesday, McCain should look into the camera and connect to the 80 million scared and worried Americans who will be watching him.
McCain is losing. To regain a chance to win, McCain must run as who he truly is; pragmatic, tough, bi-partisan and ready to break some special interest china to get the right things done in Washington.

dajafi wrote:Mike Murphy is very quickly becoming my favorite Republican consultant (which admittedly is a little like "my favorite Atlanta Brave"). He seems to have a great sense of humor, he writes pretty well, and at least for the moment he's saying something I agree with:

McCain is in trouble in Michigan for the same reason he is in trouble in GOP leaning Florida and North Carolina; when it come to strategy Team Obama is throwing the McCain High Command around the room like stunt men in a Bruce Lee picture. The terrain of the election has shifted mightily to economic fear and Obama is moving his campaign to exploit that. Meanwhile the McCain campaign retains its lamentable focus on press tactics at the expense of a real strategy. While Obama’s huge financial resources are an advantage, the vital issue for McCain is not cutting all Detroit TV spending to find money to increase a TV ad buy in Charlotte from 1700 rating points a week to 2600 rating points because Obama can afford 3800 rating points. What really counts is what message McCain is using his 1800 rating points to carry, and even more importantly what message McCain and Palin are out selling in the media every day. For the last nine weeks the McCain campaign has tried win by raising Obama’s negatives. Ads have attacked, McCain and Palin has have attacked. This has failed. Over the top negative attacks and a campaign message that too often seems to be little more than sarcasm and suppressed anger has damaged McCain’s priceless and hard earned “brand” as a different kind of Republican. McCain’s best option now is to ditch the chainsaw and offer a scared and angry country what it badly wants; hope and leadership.

Palin should drop the braying attacks on Obama’s aging hippie bomber pals and start connecting to her cherished hockey moms on the one issue they = are actually worried about; a quickly slowing economy. Chuck the hacky and ineffective negative ads and switch to man on the street spots with real people voicing their real doubts about Obama; too weak to stand up to Washington’s mighty special interest cartel or the newly empowered Democratic bosses of the Congress and Senate, too liberal to know how to fix the economy, too inexperienced to handle a dangerous world. On Tuesday, McCain should look into the camera and connect to the 80 million scared and worried Americans who will be watching him.
McCain is losing. To regain a chance to win, McCain must run as who he truly is; pragmatic, tough, bi-partisan and ready to break some special interest china to get the right things done in Washington.

Pretty consistently, the McCain 2000 guys--Murphy and John Weaver most clearly--push for their version of McCain and deplore the Rovian caricature we mostly see now. (I'd love to know what Salter really thinks.) This is self-serving, of course; they're proud (I think rightfully) of that campaign and want to make sure it isn't retroactively degraded by this effort, but I also think they realize, as the current incarnation and his team might not, that McCain 2000 is a better fit with the public mood than this year's model.

TenuredVulture wrote:It's looking a lot like Dole 96, where a truly honorable man who had spent his life in public service was turned into a raging right wing culture warrior.

When I listen to Republicans talk about "taking the gloves off" where Barack Obama's relationship to William Ayers is concerned, I think about the 1992 campaign, when George H.W. Bush went to the culture-war well in the midst of a recession and ended up losing to a philandering draft-dodger even so. The Ayers connection is completely fair game for the McCain campaign, I think, as is the Jeremiah Wright connection: Both are windows into the political world Barack Obama moved in, and the "no enemies to the left" caution with which he navigated Chicago politics. I tend to think that both connections tell you a little more about Obama's tendency to be accommodating, and to tack with the prevailing political winds which ever way they blow, than they do about his own innermost convictions - I think he's more of a "go along, get along" guy than a dyed-in-the-wool socialist - but reasonable people can disagree on this point, and either way they're fair game for talking points, speeches and campaign ads. (And yes, by the same token, there's nothing unfair or dirty about the Obama campaign raising some of McCain's dubious past associations either.)

But Bill Ayers can't win you an election, because unlike Willie Horton, Bill Ayers isn't tied to any of the issues that are uppermost in voters' minds. He tells you something about Obama's judgment, maybe, and his ideological biases, maybe - and yes, yes, with enough innuendo and doomy music, you can imply that he tells you something about Obama's softness on Islamist terrorism as well. But think about the directness of the Willie Horton ad. America has a crime problem. You don't feel safe in your own home. And Michael Dukakis want to make it worse. Think about the directness of the "white hands" ad. The economy is tanking, and the Democrats want companies to hire underqualified minorities, instead of hiring you. And then think about the implications of any Ayers ad the McCain team could cut. The stock market is tanking. The global economy is in peril. And we think the most important subject on your mind should be whether Barack Obama was too chummy with a Sixties terrorist you've probably never heard of.

I'm pretty sure that's a losing message.

gr wrote:on murphy, it pains me to say this but quick, name me a race he's consulted on that won. yeah.

lethal wrote:More liberal economists that I would've thought.

Economist wrote:AS THE financial crisis pushes the economy back to the top of voters’ concerns, Barack Obama is starting to open up a clear lead over John McCain in the opinion polls. But among those who study economics for a living, Mr Obama’s lead is much more commanding. A survey of academic economists by The Economist finds the majority—at times by overwhelming margins—believe Mr Obama has the superior economic plan, a firmer grasp of economics and will appoint better economic advisers.

Our survey is not, by any means, a scientific poll of all economists. We e-mailed a questionnaire to 683 research associates, all we could track down, of the National Bureau of Economic Research, America’s premier association of applied academic economists, though the NBER itself played no role in the survey. A total of 142 responded, of whom 46% identified themselves as Democrats, 10% as Republicans and 44% as neither. This skewed party breakdown may reflect academia’s Democratic tilt, or possibly Democrats’ greater propensity to respond. Still, even if we exclude respondents with a party identification, Mr Obama retains a strong edge—though the McCain campaign should be buoyed by the fact that 530 economists have signed a statement endorsing his plans.

Werthless wrote:

lethal wrote:More liberal economists that I would've thought.

It doesn't surprise me. Those polled were academic economists, and furthermore, no sampling was done to overcome the asymmetric response:

Economist wrote:AS THE financial crisis pushes the economy back to the top of voters’ concerns, Barack Obama is starting to open up a clear lead over John McCain in the opinion polls. But among those who study economics for a living, Mr Obama’s lead is much more commanding. A survey of academic economists by The Economist finds the majority—at times by overwhelming margins—believe Mr Obama has the superior economic plan, a firmer grasp of economics and will appoint better economic advisers.

Our survey is not, by any means, a scientific poll of all economists. We e-mailed a questionnaire to 683 research associates, all we could track down, of the National Bureau of Economic Research, America’s premier association of applied academic economists, though the NBER itself played no role in the survey. A total of 142 responded, of whom 46% identified themselves as Democrats, 10% as Republicans and 44% as neither. This skewed party breakdown may reflect academia’s Democratic tilt, or possibly Democrats’ greater propensity to respond. Still, even if we exclude respondents with a party identification, Mr Obama retains a strong edge—though the McCain campaign should be buoyed by the fact that 530 economists have signed a statement endorsing his plans.