|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: The political junkie POTUS prediction thread
|
New Yorker
Shipmate
# 9898
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Foolhearty:
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
Obama's record is that of an extreme-left winger.
Wow. I see Obama as a little left of center. He doesn't even support gay marriage. Your political spectrum may be off-kilter, NY.
Foolhearty, thanks for giving me a good chuckle. I recall an interview with a newly appointed archbishop who, when asked about his views, said something like, "I consider myself a moderate. I've been called a conservate. I've never been called a liberal."
Posts: 3193 | From: New York City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Foolhearty:
Wow. I see Obama as a little left of center. He doesn't even support gay marriage. Your political spectrum may be off-kilter, NY.
I can't remember the reference, but one of the organisations which analyses politicians' votes said recently that Obama was close to the most liberal member of the Senate, and one of the most liberal members of Congress, based on his votes in the Senate. On economic matters especially he is far more left wing than he is generally perceived. BTW, how many Senators are on the record as supporting gay marriage?
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mogwai
Shipmate
# 13555
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
quote:
Originally posted by Foolhearty:
quote:
Originally posted by New Yorker:
Obama's record is that of an extreme-left winger.
Wow. I see Obama as a little left of center. He doesn't even support gay marriage. Your political spectrum may be off-kilter, NY.
Foolhearty, thanks for giving me a good chuckle. I recall an interview with a newly appointed archbishop who, when asked about his views, said something like, "I consider myself a moderate. I've been called a conservate. I've never been called a liberal."
He's probably considered very liberal in the US, but a moderate conservative amongst leftwingers in Britain.
--------------------
:love:
Posts: 704 | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438
|
Posted
Does anyone read articles before they link to them any more? The article Jason.I.Am linked to says that, according to a nonpartisan political magazine, Obama was the most liberal Senator, based on his votes, in 2007, the tenth most liberal in 2006 and the sixteenth most liberal in 2005. Yet Jason bizarrely says this is evidence that those who say Obama is the most liberal Senator (presumably he includes me) based on his votes need to get our talking point sniffers recalibrated.
Jason, I guess you're just hoping you can lie on a thread and 95% of the people won't actually read the article you linked to to see that it says the opposite of what you said?
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
Also, even in the USA (never mind the rest of the world) being the most liberal Senator (which Obama seems not to be by a good handful of Senators) is far from being "an extreme left winger", which were the poorly chosen words used above.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zwingli:
Jason, I guess you're just hoping you can lie on a thread and 95% of the people won't actually read the article you linked to to see that it says the opposite of what you said?
Did you read the rest of the article, or are you just assuming that we won't?
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
Did Jason change the link between the time Zwingli read the article and the time I did? Otherwise I am not sure what Zwingli is talking about.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438
|
Posted
I did. It says, at most, that whether or not he was the most liberal Senator in 2007 was a matter of debate, with one magazine saying he was, and other methods of assessing saying he wasn't. Certainly it did not say that it was nonsense as you said in your post.
And my initial post, presumably one of the ones you were replying to, only cited "one of the organisations which analyses politicians' votes," not "the organisation" or "the only organisation" which was confirmed, not disproved, by your article.
Whichever way you look at it, you called what I and others wrote nonsense, and said we needed some recalibration, then linked to an article which supported, and in no way disproved, what we had said. I still say you're a liar.
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Organ Builder
Shipmate
# 12478
|
Posted
Of course, all of this begs the question why it would be a bad thing if he had (up until now) been the most liberal senator. Even at that, he managed to vote with President Bush more than some 10% of the Senate.
Some of the more conservative wing of the Republican party--the kind who in earlier days would simply have joined the John Birch Society--have been working to make "liberal" and "Godless commie" synonymous, but that doesn't make it so.
Just like "Republican" and "religious bigot" don't need to be synonymous...
--------------------
How desperately difficult it is to be honest with oneself. It is much easier to be honest with other people.--E.F. Benson
Posts: 3337 | From: ...somewhere in between 40 and death... | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
Zwingli, what does "most liberal Senator" mean? Does it mean "had what could arguably be referred to as possibly the most liberal voting record in the Senate for one year, of only those senators who voted enough times to be included in one possible analysis"?
I guess you could say those two mean the same thing. I would still call that nonsense.
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
basso
Ship’s Crypt Keeper
# 4228
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
But I for one am sentimental! So I'm happy to close it on its birthday (Nov 9th). That gives you plenty of time to get to 5450.
If we're lucky it may end up being cut off at 5440.
It's a magic number, remember.
Posts: 4358 | From: Bay Area, Calif | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Zwingli writes
Does anyone read articles before they link to them any more? The article Jason.I.Am linked to says that, according to a nonpartisan political magazine, Obama was the most liberal Senator, based on his votes, in 2007, the tenth most liberal in 2006 and the sixteenth most liberal in 2005. Yet Jason bizarrely says this is evidence that those who say Obama is the most liberal Senator (presumably he includes me) based on his votes need to get our talking point sniffers recalibrated.
Jason, I guess you're just hoping you can lie on a thread and 95% of the people won't actually read the article you linked to to see that it says the opposite of what you said?
It would appear to me that Zwingli suffers from whatever ailment he is accusing Jason of. Both are guilty of hyperbole. The linked article does not "say the opposite" of what Jason said. Rather, it indicates that McCain's generic, general claim that Obama is "the most liberal senator" is (according to the article) "barely true" since it is true only for a single year, not for his entire time in Senate (as the quote implies, but doesn't specify explicitly).
The article is calling for more accuate, careful statements, where ironically both Jason and Zwingli miss the mark.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438
|
Posted
First, you were replying (I assume) to my post which which did not call him the most liberal Senator, but said that I thought that an organisation which measures Senate votes said he was one of the most liberal. Which is exactly what the article you linked to said. In fact, it went further by saying he was the most liberal in one year, where as I only said "one of the most liberal."
And, it wasn't in any year, it was in the most recent (completed) year. If he had the most liberal voting record in the most recent year in the Senate, according to at least one impartial organisation which measures such things, then "he is the most liberal Senator" is at least a defensible point of view, and certainly not "nonsense". It certainly isn't the only possible point of view - but then, no one on this thread said it was.
You linked to the article and said our views were nonsense and we needed our sensors recalibrated, as though the article refuted us and said Obama was actually a fairly centrist Senator, when it said no such thing. I still think that you are a liar - at best your post was deliberately misleading, designed to make it look like the article refuted what I said, when in fact it confirmed, and in fact went further than, what I said.
ETA: If you Erin, Scot or Cliffdweller are too fucking stupid to see that, then I am sorry but I honestly do not know how to spell it out any simpler. Cliffdweller read this post, it answers your question about being measured in what we say, including pointing out how my first post on this was measured, though Jason's summary of it was not.
[ 07. November 2008, 18:26: Message edited by: Zwingli ]
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
As I said, Jason was engaging in hyperbole, but so were you. The article was certainly not, as you said "saying the opposite" of what Jason was saying. Nor was it saying exactly what Jason suggested it said. Both of you were exaggerating to make your point.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Organ Builder
Shipmate
# 12478
|
Posted
I really don't care about Obama's liberality or McCain's remark or the link, but I think you might want to update your signature, Zwingli...
--------------------
How desperately difficult it is to be honest with oneself. It is much easier to be honest with other people.--E.F. Benson
Posts: 3337 | From: ...somewhere in between 40 and death... | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438
|
Posted
OK, my last post on this, honestly. Cliffdweller, what you're missing is that Jason.I.Am did not say that McCain had said nonsense about Obama being the most liberal, which his article refuted. He didn't mention McCain at all. He just said "this nonsense" after I said basically the same thing as the article (as outlined in my previous post, I won't repeat it here.) Nor does the article refute what New Yorker said; he described Obama as extreme left wing, but not the most left wing - again, not refuted by the article. He then said people need recalibration - again, no mention of McCain, so presumably he meant New Yorker and I as the "people" - all up it looked to someone reading the thread that he was linking to an article which refuted New Yorker and myself, when in fact the article pretty much supported - and certainly didn't refute - what we said. And he didn't retract any of it when called on it. That is why I called him a liar, or at least deliberately misleading.
If you go back to my initial post I think you will find it both accurate and moderate.
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zwingli:
If you Erin, Scot or Cliffdweller are too fucking stupid to see that, then I am sorry but I honestly do not know how to spell it out any simpler.
Yeah, that's the problem, not you cherry-picking the article. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
Zwingli:
quote:
OK, my last post on this, honestly. Cliffdweller, what you're missing is that Jason.I.Am did not say that McCain had said nonsense about Obama being the most liberal, which his article refuted. He didn't mention McCain at all. He just said "this nonsense" after I said basically the same thing as the article (as outlined in my previous post, I won't repeat it here.) Nor does the article refute what New Yorker said; he described Obama as extreme left wing, but not the most left wing - again, not refuted by the article. He then said people need recalibration - again, no mention of McCain, so presumably he meant New Yorker and I as the "people" - all up it looked to someone reading the thread that he was linking to an article which refuted New Yorker and myself, when in fact the article pretty much supported - and certainly didn't refute - what we said. And he didn't retract any of it when called on it. That is why I called him a liar, or at least deliberately misleading.
If you go back to my initial post I think you will find it both accurate and moderate.
For someone who is so concerned about people reading actual posts/links, you are doing a remarkably poor job.
I agreed with you re: Jason. I simply pointed out that you did precisely the same thing by saying the article said "the opposite" (your word) of what Jason said. Both statements are incorrect. The article did not say what Jason said it did, but it didn't say the opposite either.
If Jason is a "liar" (a bit of an overstatement) or "deliberately misleading" you are guilty of precisely the same sin.
[ 07. November 2008, 18:48: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Foolhearty
Shipmate
# 6196
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zwingli:
BTW, how many Senators are on the record as supporting gay marriage?
No idea, but at least one fairly powerful congressman does: Barney Frank.
FWIW, I wasn't trying to compare Obama's leftiness to that of other senators. Surely the rest of us are allowed positions on that spectrum as well? I was comparing Obama's position to my own and that of various friends. From that perspective, he looks a little left-of-center, at least on social issues. He does not look anything like far left wing.
Perhaps I should move to the UK.
--------------------
Fear doesn't empty tomorrow of its perils; it empties today of its power.
Posts: 2301 | From: Upper right-hand corner | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zwingli:
I can't remember the reference, but one of the organisations which analyses politicians' votes said recently that Obama was close to the most liberal member of the Senate, and one of the most liberal members of Congress, based on his votes in the Senate. On economic matters especially he is far more left wing than he is generally perceived.
you say that like it's a bad thing.
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bullfrog.
Prophetic Amphibian
# 11014
|
Posted
It's funny that being "-wing" is almost always a pejorative.
I'm a registered democrat.
You're liberal.
He/She/It is left-wing.
I'm a registered republican.
You're conservative.
He/She/It is right-wing.
--------------------
Some say that man is the root of all evil
Others say God's a drunkard for pain
Me, I believe that the Garden of Eden
Was burned to make way for a train. --Josh Ritter, Harrisburg
Posts: 7522 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Foolhearty
Shipmate
# 6196
|
Posted
No, no, no.
It's "They are the right wing; we are the rest of the bird."
--------------------
Fear doesn't empty tomorrow of its perils; it empties today of its power.
Posts: 2301 | From: Upper right-hand corner | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jason™
Host emeritus
# 9037
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zwingli:
First, you were replying (I assume) to my post which which did not call him the most liberal Senator
Then you're having more trouble reading than I first thought. My post said exactly "this most liberal Senator nonsense". If you didn't say most liberal Senator, then I guess I wasn't talking about you.
If you actually took time to read and digest the article I linked to, you would have seen that the writer casts doubt on whether the word "liberal" as used by these ratings organizations even means the same thing as those who use it in "most liberal Senator" do. Not to mention the fact that these ratings exclude anyone who doesn't vote enough to be rated. So "most liberal Senator" isn't even close to true. "One of the more liberal senators of those who voted enough to be rated by one rating organization" would be a much better summary.
I haven't overstated the case at all. Casually flinging around the phrase "most liberal Senator" or "extreme left-wing" is regurgitation of talking points*, and it's nonsense.
*The same talking points that somehow made "liberal" a dirty word in the first place, no less.
Posts: 4123 | From: Land of Mary | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zwingli:
Jason, I guess you're just hoping you can lie on a thread and 95% of the people won't actually read the article you linked to to see that it says the opposite of what you said?
quote:
Originally posted by Zwingli:
I still say you're a liar.
Zwingli, you're out of line. Purg guideline 1 and Commandment 4. There's a difference between saying this post misrepresents and this poster is a liar. You crossed the line into personal attack.
Barnabas62
Purgatory Host
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
Predictions for 2012.
As fewer moderate Republicans hold high office, the party will gradually tilt further to the right.
Sarah Palin is one of the candidates for the Republican nomination in 2012. This, and the rightward tilt (even if slight), may leave the Republican presidential contest in a similar condition to this year - several candidates from various (shrinking) constituencies in the party, none of which can motivate the entire base.
There will be serious infighting within the party in the next few years as various of these groups strive for domination.
This will not be the end of the Republican party, but it may be the end of the dominance of the Christian right within the party. They will remain a sizable constituency, but will have to get used to more compromise within the party, which, in turn, may decrease their influence further.
Conversely, if the Christian right continues their dominance of the party, then the Republicans are in for an extended period in the minority.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Choirboy
Shipmate
# 9659
|
Posted
Mark Newmann at University of Michigan has updated his very popular spatial maps from the 2004 election with the new 2008 election data here.
He uses county level population and election return data to color the map with shades of red-purple-blue based on the proportion of vote in each state or county, along with inflating or distorting the geographical area based on population size.
Paints a rather different picture of the union, and gives some hope to Obama's vision that we are neither red nor blue, but one nation.
Posts: 2994 | From: Minneapolis, Minnesota USA | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zwingli
Shipmate
# 4438
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Organ Builder:
I really don't care about Obama's liberality or McCain's remark or the link, but I think you might want to update your signature, Zwingli...
It's to remind myself, as much as anything. Actually, good point, I think I really should take a break, at least from Purgatory, for a few weeks.
Posts: 4283 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RooK
1 of 6
# 1852
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Foolhearty:
It's "They are the right wing; we are the rest of the bird."
It makes one wonder whether it's a turkey, a cuckoo, or a dodo.
Posts: 15274 | From: Portland, Oregon, USA, Earth | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Choirboy:
Predictions for 2012.
As fewer moderate Republicans hold high office, the party will gradually tilt further to the right.
Sarah Palin is one of the candidates for the Republican nomination in 2012. This, and the rightward tilt (even if slight), may leave the Republican presidential contest in a similar condition to this year - several candidates from various (shrinking) constituencies in the party, none of which can motivate the entire base.
There will be serious infighting within the party in the next few years as various of these groups strive for domination.
This will not be the end of the Republican party, but it may be the end of the dominance of the Christian right within the party. They will remain a sizable constituency, but will have to get used to more compromise within the party, which, in turn, may decrease their influence further.
Conversely, if the Christian right continues their dominance of the party, then the Republicans are in for an extended period in the minority.
Already the loudest voices in the GOP are screaming that they lost because they weren't conservative enough--"If we had really been true to low taxes, small government, cutting spending, and moral values we would have won." My prediction is that the Christian right loonies will chase the moderates out and--unless Obama screws up big time--the Republicans will be in the wilderness for quite a while.
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Presleyterian
Shipmate
# 1915
|
Posted
The problem with the current state of the Republican Party is its fundamentally irreconcilable inconsistency. You can be in favor of small government or you can be in favor of using the power of the state to enforce your moral values.
But you can't be both.
Posts: 2450 | From: US | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Foolhearty
Shipmate
# 6196
|
Posted
That's far from the only inconsistency. How about believing that the US as a nation is specially favored by God, while keeping your kids out of the government's godless schools?
--------------------
Fear doesn't empty tomorrow of its perils; it empties today of its power.
Posts: 2301 | From: Upper right-hand corner | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
This political spectrum thing is starting to get to me, for comparison here are a series of manifestos starting at the extreme left and moving to the extreme right (note the BNP is a facist party and is probably not a worksafe link though I have linked via the BBC news site, UKIP is probably the closest we have to a "liberal" party in the sense of small government party):
New Yorker, you would not know extreme left wing if it jumped and bit you on the nose !
I realise America is culturally different from the UK, but really, nothing that is being offered by your main parties is approaching socialism except the nationalisation of the banking system. Nationalisation everybody is now doing because financial deregulation and untrammelled capitalism in that sense did not really work.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure:
My prediction is that the Christian right loonies will chase the moderates out and--unless Obama screws up big time--the Republicans will be in the wilderness for quite a while.
Way back when Hillary was still in the running I suggested if she won, and was overly aggressive about implementing her agenda, there would be a backlash in 2010 comparable to 1994. I think Obama is shrewd enough to avoid her mistakes (although a few people don't see selecting Emanuel as being particularly conciliatory), and with all the concern about 'fixing' things the mood of the nation seems less antagonistic toward 'reform'.
And IMO he scored some humility points yesterday with his 'mutt' comment; gotta love self-deprecation.
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mjg:
quote:
Originally posted by Timothy the Obscure:
My prediction is that the Christian right loonies will chase the moderates out and--unless Obama screws up big time--the Republicans will be in the wilderness for quite a while.
Way back when Hillary was still in the running I suggested if she won, and was overly aggressive about implementing her agenda, there would be a backlash in 2010 comparable to 1994. I think Obama is shrewd enough to avoid her mistakes (although a few people don't see selecting Emanuel as being particularly conciliatory), and with all the concern about 'fixing' things the mood of the nation seems less antagonistic toward 'reform'.
And IMO he scored some humility points yesterday with his 'mutt' comment; gotta love self-deprecation.
I agree with all of that. There are clear pond differences on what constitutes "radical" or "extreme liberal" or "left wing" etc and I think the labels themselves have become confusing.
To my UK/European ears, Obama sounds like a moderate and considered voice. Having as an experiment followed Fox (Faux) News during the last few weeks of the campaign, (which confirmed for me the criticism of FNC from many Shipmates) I spent just a little bit of time late last night watching "The O'Reilly Factor" which was hosted for once by Laura Ingraham. I thought O'Reilly was bad enough but Ingraham's performance made me feel even sicker. I had to turn it off before the end.
Getting back to Timothy's quote above, I suspect I'm not at all on my own in saying that it is the unpleasantness and partisanship of some on the right wing of the Republican party that really winds me up. In UK politics, after election defeats, we've seen both the Conservatives move to some self-defined "purer Conservatism" (a lurch to the right) and the Labour party (in the early 1980s) move to some self-defined "purer socialism" (a lurch to the left). Electorally, it didn't do either party any good. Polemicists don't make very good listeners.
It may take the GOP a while to rediscover a way back to broader appeal while retaining the best of its principles. But that will inevitably involve turning away from the kinds of self-righteous arrogance coming from Ingraham and others last night. Time for a bit of humility.
mjg, Mrs B and I both chuckled at Obama's "mutt" comment yesterday. We doubted whether it was considered and calculated (unlike rather a lot of the press conference). Rather like his spontaneous and considerate comments about the injured reporter, we felt it told us something good about the man.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Getting back to Timothy's quote above, I suspect I'm not at all on my own in saying that it is the unpleasantness and partisanship of some on the right wing of the Republican party that really winds me up.
IMO neither side has a lock on unpleasant partisanship, which is tangentially addressed in this article on Emanuel: it looks like he's learned from the past which will make it more difficult for the repubs to regain much traction anytime soon, unless Obama can't rein Reid and Pelosi in adequately.
Somehow I have a feeling he'll be able to focus their attention. Why, he might even be able to get their approval ratings into double digits. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
So I predict modest repub gains in 2010, and Obama in 2012.
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mjg:
IMO neither side has a lock on unpleasant partisanship
Very true. I think it's an ongoing factor in party democracies (come to think of it, in churches as well). Loyalty and partisanship often seem to get wedded together. Managing this is one of the challenges of political leadership.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
And IMO he scored some humility points yesterday with his 'mutt' comment; gotta love self-deprecation.
I loved how he managed to give a very "Obamaesque" answer to the very simple question of "what kind of dog are you gonna get?" The answer was long, nuanced, thoughtful, and inclusive of all breeds. I predict an SNL skit... : )
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mjg:
Way back when Hillary was still in the running I suggested if she won, and was overly aggressive about implementing her agenda, there would be a backlash in 2010 comparable to 1994.
The thing that strikes me about the primaries is that I really thought that Hillary was hurting the party by continuing to run after the race was essentially over. Now, it is clear that the ground game that Obama was able to put together in so many states was a direct result of the work done in contesting all those primaries.
It never ceases to amaze me how often a really smart guy like myself can so totally miss the point... ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--Tom Clune
--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.
Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amazing Grace
High Church Protestant
# 95
|
Posted
The conventional wisdom _is_ that a protracted primary battle will hurt you in the general. But it all seems to have been turned on its head with this one. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Charlotte
--------------------
WTFWED? "Remember to always be yourself, unless you suck" - the Gator
Memory Eternal! Sheep 3, Phil the Wise Guy, and Jesus' Evil Twin in the SoF Nativity Play
Posts: 6593 | From: Sittin' by the dock of the [SF] bay | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
agrgurich
Shipmate
# 5724
|
Posted
Only 723 days until the mid-term elections!
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
--------------------
Life is a comedy to those who think & a tragedy to those who feel.-Horace Walpole
AJG
Posts: 4478 | From: Michigan's Copper Country | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mamacita
Lakefront liberal
# 3659
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
I predict an SNL skit... : )
Fred Armisen has a long ways to go on improving his Obama impersonation. God willing he'll have eight years to work on it.
--------------------
Do not be daunted by the enormity of the world’s grief. Do justly, now. Love mercy, now. Walk humbly, now. You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it.
Posts: 20761 | From: where the purple line ends | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Tick tock, tick tock .... just a reminder.
[I think the thread is splitting into tangents, a number of which could form decent separate threads, if any of you want to take an iniative. Tomorrow is due to be its last day as well as its birthday.]
[ 08. November 2008, 23:58: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tclune:
It never ceases to amaze me how often a really smart guy like myself can so totally miss the point...
You amaze a lot of people with your humility.
Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amazing Grace:
The conventional wisdom _is_ that a protracted primary battle will hurt you in the general. But it all seems to have been turned on its head with this one.
Charlotte
Could it be because few candidates have made it through the primaries without doing something stupid or outrageous? ISTM Obama made it through a protracted primary battle with aplomb and without nastiness or serious missteps. OliviaG
PS Any word from Huckabee as to whether God still wants him for President? In 2012? Or 2016? ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
What about Hilary? Is she likely to try again, either in 2012 or 2016? Somehow I can't see her staying at home and knitting quietly.
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
What about Hilary? Is she likely to try again, either in 2012 or 2016? Somehow I can't see her staying at home and knitting quietly.
quote:
Originally by mjg: Way back when Hillary was still in the running I suggested if she won, and was overly aggressive about implementing her agenda, there would be a backlash in 2010 comparable to 1994. I think Obama is shrewd enough to avoid her mistakes
Only she didn't win so her "mistakes" are all in your head.
Hillary will not be knitting any time soon. She has already returned to the Senate for several important votes after giving up the presidential race, even in the midst of campaigning tirelessly and effectively for Obama. She has trounced her competition in her two runs for Senate and will probably continue to do so in the future. Good liberal Senators like Ted Kennedy and Sen. Clinton can often have a more influential political career than any President.
Long live the King, Obama, but God bless the Senator.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
moron
Shipmate
# 206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Only she didn't win so her "mistakes" are all in your head.
So the overreaching she and Bill attempted in 1993/4 RE Health Care which some pundits suggest fomented the Gingrich led repub gains in the House and Senate is another one of my delusions?
I need to talk to my doctor about these medications. ![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
Posts: 4236 | From: Bentonville | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mjg:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Only she didn't win so her "mistakes" are all in your head.
So the overreaching she and Bill attempted in 1993/4 RE Health Care which some pundits suggest fomented the Gingrich led repub gains in the House and Senate is another one of my delusions?
I need to talk to my doctor about these medications.
mjg: Your post used the words "if" and "there would be" clearing indicating that you were predicting the future, not talking about the past.
No need to make trite jokes about mental illness, your problem is communication not medication.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thread closed
Printer-friendly view
