jeff2sf wrote:Beyond the fact that I think that Summers may be underrated due to some, ahem, poor word choices, I'd in no way be happy with him being selected - it goes against the whole change theme. I'm not even saying I'd be displeased with the choice of Buffett, just that he may not have the temperament/skills for this.

Basically, I view Buffett as the freaking god of microeconomics but I'm not sure he's got the macro skill set.


Remember tho, smoothie, I speak plainly. If I was "plumping for Sommers", I simply would have said so.

jeff2sf wrote:perament/skills for this.

Basically, I view Buffett as the freaking god of microeconomics but I'm not sure he's got the macro skill set.


Remember tho, smoothie, I speak plainly. If I was "plumping for Sommers", I simply would have said so.

dajafi wrote:Interesting op-ed by Ranesh Ponnuruin the Times today about the Republicans' next steps.

The party needs to “move to the middle” less than it needs to move to the middle class: to go back to representing the interests of voters in the middle of the income spectrum.

John McCain and movement conservatives, so often at odds, have been complicit in neglecting these voters. He somehow believed that he could win a presidential election without a coherent middle-class economic agenda, and conservatives never thought to demand one from him.

Yes, Mr. McCain’s plans would have cut taxes more than Mr. Obama’s for a lot of middle-class families, but Republicans rarely bothered to point that out. Mr. McCain’s campaign smartly promised to double the tax exemption for children, but the candidate seemed unfamiliar with the idea, repeatedly describing it incorrectly. Likewise, he had an innovative health care plan, but he rarely explained how it would help the average voter.
...
Most conservatives were preoccupied in this campaign with cultural issues: flag pins, 1960s radicals and the like. These issues are legitimate, and certainly easier to understand than the details of health policy. But they have never been enough to win over most voters. Barack Obama offered a better life to most voters. Without challenging that claim, Republicans were never going to be able to portray him as out of the mainstream.

Though I doubt he'd put it this way, this strikes me as along the lines of my point that the Democrats won in large part because they seemed more serious about governing. Of course, focusing on policy arguments rather than flag pins and 1960s radicals probably helps give this impression.

gr: +1 about Shays. My wife, who's from that district and is otherwise probably more liberal than I am, was pretty upset to hear that he went down Tuesday night. He's a good man and someone I'd like to see in the administration, though I have no idea if he'd be interested.

pacino wrote:How has Oliver North become a credible political analyst?

threecount wrote:

pacino wrote:How has Oliver North become a credible political analyst?

I ask the same think about Dick Morris..I can't stand the man..everytime he is on FOX News, he still rips the Clintons, and every prediction out of his mouth turns out wrong.

TenuredVulture wrote:

dajafi wrote:Interesting op-ed by Ranesh Ponnuruin the Times today about the Republicans' next steps.

The party needs to “move to the middle” less than it needs to move to the middle class: to go back to representing the interests of voters in the middle of the income spectrum.

John McCain and movement conservatives, so often at odds, have been complicit in neglecting these voters. He somehow believed that he could win a presidential election without a coherent middle-class economic agenda, and conservatives never thought to demand one from him.

Yes, Mr. McCain’s plans would have cut taxes more than Mr. Obama’s for a lot of middle-class families, but Republicans rarely bothered to point that out. Mr. McCain’s campaign smartly promised to double the tax exemption for children, but the candidate seemed unfamiliar with the idea, repeatedly describing it incorrectly. Likewise, he had an innovative health care plan, but he rarely explained how it would help the average voter.
...
Most conservatives were preoccupied in this campaign with cultural issues: flag pins, 1960s radicals and the like. These issues are legitimate, and certainly easier to understand than the details of health policy. But they have never been enough to win over most voters. Barack Obama offered a better life to most voters. Without challenging that claim, Republicans were never going to be able to portray him as out of the mainstream.

Though I doubt he'd put it this way, this strikes me as along the lines of my point that the Democrats won in large part because they seemed more serious about governing. Of course, focusing on policy arguments rather than flag pins and 1960s radicals probably helps give this impression.

gr: +1 about Shays. My wife, who's from that district and is otherwise probably more liberal than I am, was pretty upset to hear that he went down Tuesday night. He's a good man and someone I'd like to see in the administration, though I have no idea if he'd be interested.

The problem is the whole flag pins and 60s radicals are legitimate issues. They're not. Especially since they're largely manufactured.

phdave wrote:WTF Arkansas? Is that Hillary payback?

jerseyhoya wrote:So it looks like the Dems have picked up MD-01 and VA-05, while we have held WA-08. There are five House races yet to be decided. CA-04, where we hold a narrow lead, OH-15, where I have a sneaking suspicion that woman I hate Kilroy is going to find her way into Congress, the LA-04 runoff and then scumbags from both sides: Dollar Bill Jefferson's runoff and Don Young trying to survive lots of absentee ballots.

Looks like we'll lose 21-23 seats, which is narrowly better than the 24 seat loss I predicted, and I thought I was being optimistic.

According to an interview this afternoon with Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, Minnesota election law calls for a coin toss if the race between Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) and Democrat Al Franken is exactly tied when the recount is complete.

239 votes currently separate Coleman and Franken.

jerseyhoya wrote:

According to an interview this afternoon with Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, Minnesota election law calls for a coin toss if the race between Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.) and Democrat Al Franken is exactly tied when the recount is complete.

239 votes currently separate Coleman and Franken.

America, $#@! yeah!