MyDD :: Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time in 100 days

Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time in 100 days

by esconded, Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 09:28:41 PM EST

Well it's happened: For the the first time in 100 days, McCain is a slight favorite to win the election.

Obama is only favored in states with 264 EVs; he is now a decided underdog in Ohio and Virginia.

Poblano is also making a strong case for Sebelius as Obama's running mate. Now I've cooled on Hillary after Bill's ovetures to McCain, and I don't like Kaine, Bayh or Biden. While Sebelius won't please the die-hard PUMAs, she could be effective in appealing to women. But does she really add anything? I'm hoping against hope it's Gov. Schweitzer or Gen. Clark. Any thoughts?

Tags: 538.com, Nate Silver, John McCain, Barack Obama, Kathleen Sebelius, simulations (all tags)

Permalink :: 60 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time etc. (2.00 / 1)

I think this is McCain's Saakashvili support bump, waving swords in a dull season and cussing out the Russians while O is spending time with his family and cheeseburgers before the convention and the fall push.

I'm still hoping against hope for Clark but then I also liked Webb and he's long gone.

by Christy1947 on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 09:40:10 PM EST

Agreed (none / 0)

If this is as good as it gets for McCain, we should all be very pleased.

I attended PUMACon '08!!!

by iohs2008 on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 11:39:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Honestly (2.00 / 1)

I am not as worried about the polls going into the convention. Expectations have been dwindling slowly over the last 2-3 weeks. A vigorous and strong convention will have a much bigger impact than if we were still comfortably ahead. Besides that, A lot of people think that the GOP will have a stellar one, I highly doubt it. Not after the Dems are offering a direct comparison week over week and the scheduling is far less friendly.

I think Sebelius might actually do fairly well if she gets trained properly for the national level. It would be much harder for feminists to protest the Obama campaign and it eliminates the possibility that McCain would pick someone young or particularly fresh.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 09:43:16 PM EST

Re: Honestly (none / 0)

The biggest argument against her instead of Bayh or Kaine is that women would rebel against a non-Hillary female, but I have to think that Sebelius would be ready to stand up for herself and what she's accomplished. A little spark in her belly might do a whole lot for the party.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 09:45:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Honestly (none / 0)

This isn't necessarily so.
Especially if Hillary puts her name in nomination ;)

Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.

by jsfox on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 09:52:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If it's Sebelius (none / 0)

then Hillary knows. Don't forget that it's going to be Bill to introduce the VP. I'm sure Hillary will make a point that "if it can't be me, I'm glad it's Kathleen"

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 11:03:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (2.00 / 6)

Will BO supporters never stop smearing HRC and the Clinton's. "I've cooled on Hillary after Bill's ovetures to McCain" he did no such thing. But i guess when you do nothing but parse and alter what the clinton's say it is hard to stop.

And while i am on it i get a little sick of the PUMA nonsense. It is just another backhanded way to insult HRC supporters.

I guess i am just a troll who doesnt think the best way to unite the party is to continue insulting us. But i guess dems and agree to disagree about that.

david

by giusd on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 09:46:14 PM EST

Re: Poblano: (2.00 / 4)

Thank you. I was just thinking the very same thing. It's amazing how many tall tales these so-called Democrats like to tell about Bill Clinton.

by LakersFan on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 09:51:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

see this is another reason... (2.00 / 3)

im getting tired of it here... there is a lot of revisionist history going on and i keep letting it go for the sake of not rehashing the past. but it really is getting wearisome.

"Democracy! Bah! When I hear that I reach for my feather Boa!" Allen Ginsberg

by canadian gal on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:03:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: see this is another reason... (2.00 / 2)

In a way, it's worse than the primaries. During the primaries, we were all fighting with each other. Now, most of us don't want to, but we have these ass holes who try and stir shit up by making comments like this.

Another Clintonista against John McCain

by psychodrew on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:09:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

exactly. (2.00 / 1)

it is worse than the primaries. and the good folk here are seemingly being outnumbered by the... not-so-good folk.

"Democracy! Bah! When I hear that I reach for my feather Boa!" Allen Ginsberg

by canadian gal on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:12:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: exactly. (2.00 / 1)

I must disagree - there's no way this is worse than the primaries.

by rfahey22 on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:17:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

in a way it is... (2.00 / 3)

on average about 15 times a day - someone here at mydd (let alone other sites) smears or outright lies about HRC, Bill or what you know actually happened during the primary or is going on now. and those c4o are in a real bind... we can fight every one or let it go. speaking for most of us - we let it go in the name of moving forward. but constant lies are hard to take when you can't fight back. its not easy.

"Democracy! Bah! When I hear that I reach for my feather Boa!" Allen Ginsberg

by canadian gal on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:22:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: in a way it is... (2.00 / 2)

I hadn't thought of it that way, but I suppose it makes sense.

by rfahey22 on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:24:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yeah (2.00 / 1)

on the other side, I know how it feels.

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 11:10:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: in a way it is... (2.00 / 1)

One thing I do like presently is the absence of the instantly rec'd diaries from the same awful, hateful (and maybe a bit touched) diarists. I don't always agree with people, and of course there are trolls, but at least I'm not looking at those same three names every day.

Saxby Chambliss: Asshat

by mikeinsf on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 01:04:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: in a way it is... (2.00 / 2)

Don't fight, but do gently correct it. Acceptance and promotion of demon tales about major Dems damages the brand, and makes all Dems more vunerable to attack.

You are Joe average voter. You have heard for decades that Bill Clinton was a big phony and a crook, Gore was a big phony and a meanie and insane, Kerry was a big phony and faked his medals, Hillary Clinton was a big nasty b----. Now you hear that Obama is a lightweight, phony, celebrity. Well if you heard all those other Dems were trashy, and even other Dems repeated it, this latest trashing is not too hard to believe is it?

Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.

by itsthemedia on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 01:43:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: in a way it is... (none / 0)

That is such an important point. We damage our brand so much by doing this. Republicans revere their former Presidents, even those that are known crooks and liars. We definitely need to market our brand better.

by LakersFan on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 01:46:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (2.00 / 5)

And while i am on it i get a little sick of the PUMA nonsense. It is just another backhanded way to insult HRC supporters.

Ok I know I should just leave this alone, but....

I may not have voted for her, but I never really went to the dark side about it, she just wasn't the candidate I supported

Now as to the PUMA 50. I have to disagree. This small faction as far as I'm concerned no longer has anything to do with Hillary. They've backed themselves into some alternative universe and now have no way out. They are a lunatic fringe concerned more about Obama hate than the love of Hillary.

And Hillary plans to control them at the convention.

In an unusual move, Hillary Clinton's staff is creating a 40-member "whip team" at the Denver Democratic convention to ensure that her supporters don't engage in embarrassing anti-Obama demonstrations during the floor vote on her nomination, according to people familiar with the planning.

Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.

by jsfox on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:06:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree with you (none / 0)

For the PUMA people, their resistance really isn't so much about Hillary so Hillary cannot get them to support Obama (unless, of course, he picks her as VP, then many of them might out of loyalty to her). Their anger is more directed at the Democratic party establishment, activists, and the strong Obama supporters. They feel those people have hijacked the party and they want them to get their comeuppance. They also just can't stand Obama. Many will support McCain because enemy of my enemy is my friend.

by lombard on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:26:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (2.00 / 2)

The best way to unite the party is to deride and disparage and complain about Barack Obama and whine about Hillary Clinton not getting any respect. Clearly, the only way to achieve party unity is by destroying Obama. This is the puma approach, isn't it?

And that's why you can't compare mild criticism of Clinton with the kind of slash and burn smear mentality of the pumas. So don't start, please.

"This victory alone is not the change we seek -- it is only the chance for us to make that change." -- Nov. 4, 2008

by BobzCat on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:23:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (2.00 / 1)

I'm hardly a PUMA; however the attacks on Clinton by people in our own party; hell on this very site have not been MILD. Often they have been unfounded, vicious character assassinations that practically had Karl Rove's signature at the end. I can't let the comment of "mild criticisms" stand. That being said yes I am voting for Obama now and I also just wrote a very lengthy post about what I hope to God the party will do to from a strategy standpoint as I think it is the way to win. Right now I don't think we are on that path & I lose sleep at night over that concept.

by jrsygrl on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:41:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (none / 0)

Part of McCain's strategy is to depress Democratic turnout. One way he is doing that is by using his communications people and blogger outreach to exploit divisions in the Democratic party. Many of the people attacking Clinton here and insulting Democrats joined after Obama had won and McCain had his communications shop set up. No doubt some are serving him, but most are just his useful idiots.

My advice is to not take their bait.

by souvarine on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 12:29:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (2.00 / 2)

The primary is over.

Harsh words were said on all sides. I'm not going to rehash them. But the harshest words that came out of the traditional media occurred after the "kitchen sink" strategy shocked a lot of long-time political observers; the campaign really drew a lot of negative attention to itself at that time. Before that, it was pretty even-handed punditry for the most part. Both candidates got plenty of stupid treatment from the blathering class (which, of course, is always all too eager to turn Democrats against one another given any opportunity to do so).

If you found harsher words spoken on the blogs, well, anonymous people on websites tend to be uninhibited in their viciousness, and frankly, a lot of them are not too stable.

But it may also be because the left blogosphere is itself in some ways a product of progressive disappointment in the Clinton presidency. In some quarters, it's felt that those two terms didn't make enough impact in terms of progressive ideals, and constituted a great opportunity squandered for arguably selfish reasons. A lot of progressives were disgruntled enough in 2000 to vote for Nader or sit it out. Others turned to the internet and started organizing. The antipathy toward the DLC and disappointment in the weak party the Clinton presidency left behind I believe led to much of the more strident criticism of Hillary, especially when she emerged as the "establishment" candidate and front-runner well ahead of the first caucus vote. The fact that her campaign never really tried to establish an effective internet presence probably earned her some more scorn from those invested in their own importance as bloggers. Clinton never was going to win over the blogosphere, and I think her campaign never really bothered to try.

As a result, for someone spending an inordinate amount of time at the computer, it certainly looked like Hillary took a lion's share of the shit. But you'd have to look closer to understand why. And if you want to point to over-the-top attacks, I'd argue that most of them come from third-rate bloggers, trolls, and neophytes multi-tasking between political blogs and porn sites. In much the same way, the most virulent anti-Obama diatribes can currently be sourced back to a few sites and a handful of unhinged individuals alt-tabbing between here and Stormfront.

The point is, let it go. We have an outstanding candidate right now, and a campaign that, while not beyond reproach, has been strong and solid all spring and summer. And at this point, anyone who says otherwise is shilling for John McCain and isn't welcome in Hillary Clinton's Democratic Party.

"This victory alone is not the change we seek -- it is only the chance for us to make that change." -- Nov. 4, 2008

by BobzCat on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 12:35:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (none / 0)

Thanks for the context. A lot of people forget that the left wing of the party never really loved the Clintons.

Saxby Chambliss: Asshat

by mikeinsf on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 01:16:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (2.00 / 1)

The "kitchen sink" strategy was a creation of the media. The term "kitchen sink" was sourced to an unnamed Clinton staffer - in other words, there is no real evidence the term was ever used. Clinton's campaign did attack Obama, but they attacked him with some very standard and really rather mild stuff, and were savaged by the media for being so utterly nasty.

I don't blame Obama for the media atmosphere, or for taking advantage of it. That just shows he has good political instincts. But we as Democrats and liberals must learn to stop perpetuating these false media narratives.

Accepting and promoting demonization of Dems damages the brand. People will be more willing to believe crap about Obama, because they have been told for decades that all big Dems are phonies and nasties.

Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.

by itsthemedia on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 01:33:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (2.00 / 1)

I'm don't really want to go there, but in my perception, lines were crossed that I hadn't seen crossed for as long as I've been watching primary races. The term may have floated to the top merely as a pithy descriptive of observable evidence. We'll just have to disagree on that point.

You're right, though, that it's probably best to retire the phrase for now, since we're sure to see it return in Republican ads down the road.

"This victory alone is not the change we seek -- it is only the chance for us to make that change." -- Nov. 4, 2008

by BobzCat on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 03:26:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (none / 0)

Really, like the line crossed when BO supporters went around calling the clinton's racist. Or calling HRC voters low info racist voters.

I guess you missed that line. As a democrat i will never forgive the BO campaign for the worse, lowest smears EVER!

david

by giusd on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 08:35:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

and I'll never forgive (none / 0)

the Clinton supporters who called me a sexist, traitorous snot-nosed brat who should go back to "listening to rap music and drinking too much" and leave governing to competent adults.

but I'll get over it

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 08:52:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (none / 0)

Sorry, you get a rhetorical FAIL.

I referenced comments and statements made by the campaign and the candidate herself at a specific time in the campaign. Those are documented matters of record, part of a mainstream narrative that received much attention at the time.

You respond by making a false equivalence, citing vague supporters (presumbly on the internet), making gross generalizations, and then ascribing them to the campaign itself in the most hyperbolic tone possible.

This is why your arguments aren't taken seriously, david. They're rhetorically dishonest.

"This victory alone is not the change we seek -- it is only the chance for us to make that change." -- Nov. 4, 2008

by BobzCat on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 01:01:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: (none / 0)

David, I honestly believe that the lion's share of the acrimony was ginned up by the media. The media were the ones who parsed every word out of Bill's mouth to find things they could twist into racial comments. The media were the ones dancing on Hillary's grave every time she looked down and out. Once Obama was well ahead, it was the media that whipped up the Wright business and all the rest. They went out of their way to split the Dems along racial lines, because that was their preferred story line.

Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.

by itsthemedia on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 11:55:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time in (none / 0)

Rasmuessen and SurveyUSA polled Obama 10 pts lower than he did against Clinton in the primaries in Virgina. I think that they are still polling Obama 10 pts lower than what he is really doing. I think Obama is going to crush McBush in Virginia. SurveyUSA polled the winner in Ohio which was Clinton on the money. So, I have to believe that Obama is behind there. I think Obama will crush McBush in Colorado too. I don't think that Obama will beat McBush in Florida, but he does have a chance. Montana, and NC could go for Obama too.

by Spanky on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 09:47:10 PM EST

Re: Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time in (none / 0)

That is IF... IF... he turns around the narrative and owns his issues.

"Hey, check it out. You just had yourself a glue OD. So you're learning another lesson. Don't do too much glue, or your night sucks."

by vcalzone on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 09:49:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time in (none / 0)

I believe that voters are still deciding whether they want an old guy who has been in DC forever, or real change. I still believe that Obama is going to crush McBush in a landslide just like Reagan did. When voters go to the polls they will be voting their pocketbooks. They won't want 4 more years of high food prices, maybe a new war somewhere because McBush has such a bad temper he is bound to get us into another war.

by Spanky on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 09:58:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I have to steal the famous line from Lloyd Bentsen (none / 0)

I knew Ronald Reagan, I liked him. Ronald Reagan was a friend of mine. Senator Obama, you are no Ronald Reagan.

by lombard on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:18:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I have to steal the famous line from Lloyd Ben (none / 0)

Senator Obama, you are no Ronald Reagan

Thank God!

Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof.

by jsfox on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:40:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fair enough, perhaps, but (none / 0)

Reagan had candidate qualities that Obama is lacking. Six months before the 1980 election, many voters were very wary of Reagan but the more they saw him the more they warmed up to him and trusted him. Obama, on the other hand, has suffered from overexposure and too lofty expectations advanced by the media and his supporters. People have seen too much of Obama and the reality doesn't match the hype.

by lombard on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:51:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Fair enough, perhaps, but (none / 0)

You have no evidence for that.

We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.

by politicsmatters on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:53:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Typical liberal shut down line (none / 0)

When someone says something you don't like, demand empirical evidence of their observation. Don't you people ever get tired of using the same old lines?

by lombard on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 11:17:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yawn (none / 0)

I think what was meant is remember that this is merely your OPINION. Opinions tend not to always correlate into facts. Also, remember it's still August and Obama hasn't even began to present himself to America when people are actually paying attention.

by SocialDem on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 11:30:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Typical liberal shut down line (2.00 / 1)

Wow, did you just use liberal as a pejorative on this site?

by Cincinnatus on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 04:07:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Reagan was well known (none / 0)

Ronald Reagan had run for president in 1968 and 1976. Everyone knew that Ronald Reagan was a conservative who was pro-life and for cuts in domestic spending, less taxes, and huge increases in defense spending.

Barack Obama is a lot like Jimmy Carter, except that Obama is much more articulate than Carter. Carter was quite wishy-washy in the 1976 campaign. But remember, Carter did win in 76.

Dizzy Zzyzzy

by Zzyzzy on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 02:55:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

How true (none / 0)

And this election is much like 1976. A vague, inexperienced, and wishy washy Democrat running against a badly damaged Republican party with a candidate not many are too excited about.

by lombard on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 11:15:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

so now it's ok (none / 0)

to praise Reagan?

The American people; they were for the war before they were against it.

by nrafter530 on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 11:08:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It was always OK with me (none / 0)

by lombard on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 11:13:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Dream on sonny (none / 0)

As Mark Twain once said: all a person needs in life is ignorance and confidence.

by lombard on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:20:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Let's see what happens after the (2.00 / 3)

the Democratic Convention.

by puma on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 09:51:44 PM EST

Re: Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time in 1 (2.00 / 1)

I liked what I saw tonight on the live feed of his Lynchburg stop. If we get a feisty Obama for the rest of the way, I feel like we have a decent shot (remember, McCain is going to have to rely on 527's and the RNC from here on out to do his heavy lifting - he's only going to have $80 million to play with beginning in September).

by rfahey22 on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:10:21 PM EST

If her response to the SOTU speach is typical (none / 0)

I can't see how she would add anything to any ticket. Talk about uninspiring and vapid! I'm assuming that she has to be better than she showed there but anyone getting very excited about her sure didn't see that response. From a purely electoral standpoint, Clinton would be his best choice but I doubt his ego (or his wife and closest supporters) will allow him to do that. Barring that, I think Biden probably is the best choice of those who have been mentioned.

by lombard on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:14:21 PM EST

re: (2.00 / 1)

I'm fine with Biden, Clark, Bayh. I like Kaine and Sebelius, but I don't think either one of them is a great fit here. I don't particularly see Schweitzer as realistic.

I still think it's Biden, to be honest. Minner can appoint a solid Dem to his place, he has the experience and foreign policy background, and he would be a very effective counter against McCain and his VP as an attack dog.

But let's play a hypothetical game for a moment. Let's assume that Obama hasn't made up his mind and that there are 3-5 guys, with perhaps a darkhorse in the mix somewhere. Let's say he's also following the polling, and his own internal polls show similar trend lines. Again, just a hypothetical (although a very plausible hypothetical). What pick does he make that is the closest to a home run?

In this case, I would argue that Biden would be too big a risk. Kaine is a guy who needs the VP more than Obama needs Kaine as the VP. Kaine is still 2nd fiddle, if not 3rd fiddle, in terms of Virginia state Democrats, and the recent economic news won't play well. I don't think Kaine would be a home run type pick if Obama is worried about the trends. Richardson? Let's be blunt about things - would Richardson address any concerns with the blue collar white families? Heck, would he generate excitement? Neither seems likely. Sebelius, in this case, might be a safe pick, but her lack of experience in the foreign policy arena would be a problem.

That leaves Bayh, maybe Clark, and whatever darkhorse is out there. I know, the initial response is probably that I'm crazy to suggest that there exists a situation where Bayh might be the home run. But look matters - and an image of this "All-American" Caucasian guy with the multiethnic Obama would play better than many thing. Reaching out to Bayh would be a move to make peace with the DLC, assuming that's what he wants (that is, if he fears McCain's grabbing the middle - if Obama thinks the right move is to "mobilize the base", then Kaine might get a nod). After all, Bayh is the only one left standing that was a strong HRC advocate, and it stands very likely that HRC might be more supportive of this move than any other possibility, outside of perhaps Clark. The most important thing - Bayh wouldn't upset the dynamics of the race. He wouldn't upset the tone of this being "Obama's campaign", but he would offer enough experience to push things (unlike say, Kaine or Sebelius). He'd be Gore to Bill. Of course, there is the gigantic fact of losing a Senate seat.

Again, just hypotheticals. this isn't that well thought out ... writing on the fly. Personally, my guess is that they'll go with Biden and hope that Biden toes the company line.

by toonsterwu on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:25:09 PM EST

Re: re: (2.00 / 2)

At this point the best nominee may be Clinton, if she in fact wants it. Would they use primary clips against them? Sure, but they've already called Obama a traitor and a Muslim. Fuck 'em, let's go out with guns blazing. It's not like anyone outside of us political junkies know that Bayh is affiliated with the DLC, nor would anyone particularly care that such a selection would "make peace" with a group of insiders.

If it isn't her, it should be someone else who can reassure wavering Dems.

by rfahey22 on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:33:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: re: (2.00 / 1)

This is something we totally agree on. The GOP is going to attack who ever they are running against. As DEMS we should day fuck'em if they attack us then we should attack them back 5 times. If we whine it just makes us look weak.

david

by giusd on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:43:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time in 1 (none / 0)

HILLARY or he loses

by nikkid on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 10:51:30 PM EST

Re: Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time in 1 (2.00 / 1)

Silly.

Saxby Chambliss: Asshat

by mikeinsf on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 01:21:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time in 1 (2.00 / 1)

Well, it may be a bit overstated, but it is a valid point of view. I think Hillary would be the strongest choice, but clearly he could win without her, or lose with her. It's a long long time until November, a lot can and will happen, and many factors will determine the outcome.

Your attempt to change the subject to "the issues" is irrelevant.

by itsthemedia on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 01:56:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time in 1 (2.00 / 2)

I think she would be a fine choice. In fact, I'm thinking she might be the best choice after all. It's the "or else" tone of some of these comments that I find silly.

Saxby Chambliss: Asshat

by mikeinsf on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 02:06:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Poblano: McCain the favorite--first time in 1 (none / 0)

I think your record is broken. record is broken. record is broken. record is broken. record is broken. record is broken.

by Cincinnatus on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 04:09:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yeah, this is scary (2.00 / 1)

I want Clark or Sebelius. Biden is okay, but he does kind of undermine Obama by having so many years in DC. I think Biden has been a smokescreen. I think he and HRC will be great surrogates.

I'll be okay with whomever Obama chooses. It's funny because all the pundits say Obama should be up by more and at the same time they talk about big leads Democrats have had in the summer and ended up losing.

I still have faith that Team Obama has a strategy that they are implementing. I think the Democratic Convention will have huge interest. Part of it will be people curious about what the Clintons will do. So in a way, the drama may help Obama with the ratings. I think the Clintons will come through in the end. I am optimistic. I watched Obama's town hall in Lynchburg and he was really good. He got quite a few standing O's from the crowd. I have a hard time imagining that once Obama is in the non-stop campaigning mode, while McCain takes the weekends off, he will kick ass.

McCain spent 32 million this month. He has bought his lead by creating doubt about Obama. I don't think his attacks will be that effective once they disappear from TV. Obama has substance and anyone that doesn't already hate him can see that.

by Lolis on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 11:00:13 PM EST

Stop Freaking Out (2.00 / 2)

I think that the people who thought this was going to be easy for Obama and the Democrats were absolutely DELUSIONAL. This was going to be a tough slog no matter who the Dems nominated--Hillary, Obama, Edwards (gulp, thank God that didn't happen). Go back and look at the popular vote totals from the past several elections. Even the great Bill Clinton couldn't crack 50 percent.

So be prepared to fight for this.

P.S. If you want to get fired up for the battles ahead, I recommend listening to Al Pacino's "Inches" speech from "Any Given Sunday". Add it to your iPod. It's awesome.

by Will Graham on Wed Aug 20, 2008 at 11:51:29 PM EST

Re:more BS (2.00 / 1)

"decided underdog in Ohio and Virginia"..
More of your BS man

http://www.pollster.com/polls/oh/08-oh-p res-ge-mvo.php

http://www.pollster.com/polls/va/08-va-p res-ge-mvo.php

seriously..
bookmark this for future reference...

http://www.pollster.com/

"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"

by nogo postal on Thu Aug 21, 2008 at 12:29:36 AM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.