2010 Mid Term Election Commentary: October 12

By request of Alki, Filistro, and others, I’ve started a Tuesday/Thursday/Saturday thread for election and polling-related chatter.

Vamos a gozar.

About Monotreme

Monotreme is an unabashedly liberal dog lover, writer, and former scientist who now teaches at a University in an almost-square state out West somewhere. http://www.logarchism.com | http://www.sevendeadlysynapses.com
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

216 Responses to 2010 Mid Term Election Commentary: October 12

  1. filistro says:

    Latest from Pollster:AK.. Miller 35, Murkowski 33NV.. Reid back up by 2, 47-45(Still not seeing that 90 seat wave.)

  2. filistro says:

    Oh… and thanks, Mr U! This is exactly what we wanted 🙂

  3. DC Petterson says:

    There’s an interesting article in today’s Minneapolis Star-Tribune about the state of the local Tea Party. I think it reflects a larger battle, not only within the Republican establishment, but even patricide within the Teapers.Are they going to allow themselves to be bought out by their corporate sponsors? While they sell their souls for electoral success — which then will, of course, mean nothing? Or will they remain true to their ideals (such as they are)?Short version — even the Teapers are coming to realize that at least half of them are whores, being bought by extremely wealthy sugar daddies who don’t believe a word of the anti-elitist rhetoric. This is an oligarchy trying to seize control of the Republican Party — and, through it, using media outlets like FOX to place employees into government positions. It’s nothing short of an attempted fascist coup happening live on cable TV.

  4. filistro says:

    Nate has at long last been forced to write a headline that’s not entirely negative for Dems:Modest Gains for Democrats in Gubernatorial ForecastBy NATE SILVERFollowed by some equivocation:Although we’ve been skeptical about the notion that the overall political environment has improved by any discernible margin for Democrats, there are some exceptions in gubernatorial elections around the country. In recent weeks, Democrats have moved into the lead in the gubernatorial race in California, while closing their deficits in other states where they once trailed badly…At this point I think the best of all possible outcomes for Dems would be for the GOP to win the House by 5-10 seats. That forces them to take the steering wheel on a vehicle that has its brakes frozen in place so it can’t move. Let THEM see how it feels for a couple of years. And with a majority that narrow, the public will not tolerate wasteful shutdowns or Darryl Issa fishing expeditions, either.

  5. Monotreme says:

    Nate just posted an article on Washington State where he grudgingly admitted:a) Patty Murray has a pretty good chance, after allb) the polling numbers he’s seeing don’t make any senseHe stopped short of calling them “dime store junk” à la Charlie Cook, but he did use the most excellent turn of phrase In the absence of any other information, the thing you usually do when polls diverge is simply to average them and hope for the best.

  6. filistro says:

    Alki got a good comment published on the Gubernatorial thread at NYT.They seem to like your style, Alki… you have no trouble slipping through the filter over there. Could you figure out a way to unobtrusively post a link to this site without getting zapped?I worry there are still a few of our lost friends over there who would like to find us but can’t…. and who (whether right or left) are definitely going to need an outlet during the election (and its aftermath… 😦 I’ve tried a couple of times but they won’t accept mine anymore.

  7. Realist says:

    @Monotreme,Nate is also missing just how far off the mark Ras is likely to be in Washington. He goes back to 2000 in looking at how Ras does, and suggests that vote-by-mail is the reason for the poor results.Washington wasn’t all vote-by-mail until very recently (and still isn’t in King County). So, if anything, Ras is probably off by even more than his historical numbers would suggest. In Washington state, that is. YMMV elsewhere.

  8. filistro says:

    Reid has regained his slight edge after a short, sharp slide… so Ras has just whipped up a new poll showing Angle up by 1… 49-48.I wonder if Scotty is getting worried…

  9. Jack says:

    Not sure where you are getting the info of a 90 seat wave. Nate and Sabato are at R+47. Cook is at R+40. I think Nate has taught us there are a wide range of possibilites. I suppose 90 is possible, but it’s sure an extreme possibility.

  10. shiloh says:

    @DCapologies to whores who probably know economics and ulterior motives a lot better than most teabaggers …Just sayin’

  11. DC Petterson says:

    @shilohAn excellent point.

  12. filistro says:

    @Jack.. Not sure where you are getting the info of a 90 seat wave. HiJack! (‘ll bet you get really tired of that. Especially at a website where you can be constantly accused of doing it to threads… :-)Steve Lombardo is now predicting a 60-70 seat wave.The 90-seat number comes from our Bart, who of course has never, ever been wrong.

  13. filistro says:

    did I drop another tag?

  14. filistro says:

    Hey… the hyperlink tag doesn’t carry over if dropped like the others do. We should isolate that html anomaly and encourage it through selective breeding of htmls.Who wants the first puppy?

  15. Jack says:

    I will admit to being unfamiliar of the website you mentioned, but even 60-70 isn’t 90. Again, I’ll have to plead ignorance, but I seriously doubt they have as strong a rep as someone like Cook or Nate.I also am not sure how much stock I would put into a single poster as you have. My peronsal analysis has it at R+42. And of course all that does is to confirm the axiom “opinions are like…everyone has one.” 🙂

  16. filistro says:

    @Jack… I also am not sure how much stock I would put into a single poster as you have. Normally I wouldn’t… but Bart is never wrong.Seriously, I hope you’re the one who’s right. 42 would be a dream result for me. Enough to give the Reps the gavel… not enough for them to do anything with it.

  17. Jack says:

    Again, I am not attempting in any way to say my current prediction of 42 has more value than someone like Nate or Charlie Cook. But I do wonder, if the number is indeed 42, is that a D or R win?My guess is each side will attempt to claim victory, but is getting control of the House, even by the tiniest of margins, a win for the Rs?

  18. Realist says:

    @Jack,“opinions are like…everyone has one.”Opinions are like Facebook pages? 😀

  19. shiloh says:

    “When I first heard about the campaign to get me to host Saturday Night Live, I didn’t know what Facebook was, and now that I do know what it is, I have to say … it sounds like a huge waste of time.” ~ Betty White

  20. Alki says:

    Caution is advised: this is an internal poll for the Dems but Sestak has taken the lead in PA:http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/polls/13765

  21. Alki says:

    filistro……I don’t have time now but I will do a post over at the NYT and find a way to link it back here.

  22. 73Nike St says:

    Apparel….$100Shoes….$50Golf Clubs….$175Hats….$25Polos….$35ALL ON SALE!!!789ty890ayghiulh…89ya9ysd…47645375g4356.y3566…36.57.35.67.356.7..h..45.67376.y3.y.5673.7.3.567.356.y.3..6.7.356.765.67.56.6756756.7….65.7.34yht.5h.563.367.6.345.34.567.34yh4.56..34.7y.3y.gh.45.64.57.34.7y.364.7.34.7

  23. filistro says:

    @Alki… I will do a post over at the NYT and find a way to link it back here.Thanks so much, Alki :-)It’s most effective if you do it when a new blog entry has just gone up so you’re among the earlier comments. A lot of people seem to just read the first couple dozen comments.

  24. Nina Goodies says:

    Golf Clubs….$150Kayaks….$500Bowling Balls…$50Shoes….$50ALL ON SALE!346.357356.73.56….3567.35….3567.536.7…356.7.5376….3567.356.67….34.56..8..2..6.78..8…34.356..68..4.3.5673..57…..4357..67.356….24574.7..7…457.4.7….3457.3.567.

  25. marc miwerdz says:

    Fwiw dept: Dick(sic)Morris on the Hannity show said 100 seats. Also did anyone notice Nate called it the Democrat party 2 posts ago? Wow he is really bending over backwards to appeal to these baggers. just sayin

  26. Beverly says:

    that’s a lienate said “vote democrat” not “democrat party”that is common parlance and is totally acceptablei wish we democrats weren’t so thin-skinned as to see every use of the word “democrat” that we think should be “democratic” as an insult

  27. Beverly says:

    here’s the linkhttp://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/here’s the quote”Even though West Virginia voted Democrat for president 14 out of 17 times from 1932 to 1996″

  28. Mainer says:

    Well it is not looking like much of a wave in Maine. Raz is out with another poll where he still has the Republican candidate at 35 (If one figures in house effect for Raz they get into the neighborhood every one else is in) the Dem at 32 and the major Independent Cutler (yeah Cutler this is an unpaid add and I approved it)at 21 % and with 2 other indies splitting 6% and 6% undecided. Conventional wisdom had Cutler taking from the Dem Mitchell but so far it seems his growth of late from 9% to 21% has come straight out of Republican Lepage’s hide.I still say the race is between the Dem and the Indy Cutler and both the Dem and the Rep had best be watching over their shoulders. We like Independent Govs here in Maine and we have had 2 in my voting life and it is high time for another.Our 2 Dem representitives should win handily (most likely double digits) even though out side intrets are flooding the state with money. Now on the whole money thing the Federal court today upheld the Maine Clean election law which James (Citizen United) Bopp had challenged because another of his clients (NOM, national organization for marriage) got caught playing games when they defeated the samesex marriage law by flooding the state with outside money and didn’t want to have t report where it came from. So it seems the scores of law suite to knock down clean election laws going on really really want to get in front of the Roberts court before there might just be a shift. God forbid we had honest accounting of election money.Oh and has anybody else noticed the number of fundamentalist ministers and church members running for local legislatures? Just a Maine situation? I bet not. We have a crap load of of these dudes running for the Maine legislature. Some ofthem I know and like but I don’t want them running the damned state as they can be a little narrow minded. But they will tell you to a man that they are all about the tea party and what they are doing has nothing to do with social conservatism or their blatent homophobia or rather interesting views on society as a whole. No sir nothing behind this here curtain….move along, move along….shsssh now folks back there don’t be launching into no gosphel music quite yet we un’s are Libertarians not evannnnnnnngelicals, no sirreeeeeee. Do I hear an Amen????Oh crap I mean………..

  29. shiloh says:

    @BeverlyI wish we democrats weren’t so thin-skinned~~~~~Indeed, which is why I’m a liberal independent. ;)Again, some peeps were upset in 2009 when Bartles, Rudy, Grog, Jeff, MPM, and the rest of 538’s trollish merry men 🙂 called HCR Obamacare.This after all of 2008 Obama was called Communist, Socialist, Marxist, Islamo-Fascist, Satan, The Devil Incarnate, The Anti-Christ, a Muslim born in Kenya, who wakes up every morning hating America and Americans yada yada yada lolSoooo when Bartles et al frequently used Obamacare one just had to smile knowing he was easily elected the 44th President of the United States of America! :)Perspective people.btw, Bartles and the rest of 538’s winger trolls were 100% sure health care reform would never pass.Oops! Never say never.>You can call me Ray or you can call me Jay …

  30. filistro says:

    @Mainer… No sir nothing behind this here curtain….move along, move along….shsssh now folks back there don’t be launching into no gosphel music quite yet we un’s are Libertarians not evannnnnnnngelicals, no sirreeeeeee. Do I hear an Amen????Oh crap I mean………..LOLOLOL!!!Mainer, you’re wonderful 🙂 And I swear I’ve herad that same busy, furtive rustling behind the curtains. Plus the super-secret procedural handout for Tea Party campaign workers that warns: “Please observe the following rules until the election has ended:1.) All Bibles to be concealed in plaid or flowered covers2.) No laying on of hands or speaking in tongues until after polls have closed3.) Anyone given to faith healing is asked to perform these acts in the hallway behind the speaker’s platform” They’re jut so wily. But they can’t fool us 😉

  31. filistro says:

    Hey, that’s a good price for bowling balls…

  32. Mainer says:

    Good price for bowling balls????? no such thing if one is the gutter ball king of the universe.Now if they are those little candlepin balls I could be interested but for less than that. Did you know that given the right size piece of well caasing and enough black powder and a little fuze material that one can build one hell of a cannon……..that is what I have been told any way…..hmmmmmmm I know where there are some old big bowling balls and I got friends wit hsome big honking pipe……wonder how much triple FG it would take to launch one of them suckers?????? Retoricaly speaking of course……

  33. filistro says:

    @Mainer… wonder how much triple FG it would take to launch one of them suckers?????? Retoricaly speaking of course…..No matter what age men attain… they’re all still 10-year-olds at heart 🙂

  34. Mainer says:

    A plea for help! I am going nuts and may be suicidal. Please hepl me.

  35. filistro says:

    From Pollster just now… something we’ve long suspected. Cell-phone-only customers skew polling in a way that favors Republicans.Hmmm…

  36. filistro says:

    From the cell-phone polling article… “R advantage 4-6 points in the margin.”HMMMM….

  37. shiloh says:

    Exclusive: Chamber Receives At Least $885,000 From Over 80 Foreign Companies In Disclosed Donations AloneLast week, ThinkProgress published an exclusive story about the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s foreign fundraising operation. We noted the Chamber raises money from foreign-owned businesses for its 501(c)(6) entity, the same account that finances its unprecedented $75 million dollar partisan attack ad campaign. While the Chamber is notoriously secretive, the thrust of our story involved the disclosure of fundraising documents U.S. Chamber staffers had been distributing to solicit foreign (even state-owned) companies to donate directly to the Chamber’s 501(c)(6).We documented three different ways the Chamber fundraises from foreign corporations: (1) An internal fundraising program called “Business Councils” used to solicit direct, largely foreign contributions to the Chamber, (2) Direct contributions from foreign multinationals like BP, Siemens, and Shell Oil, and (3) From the Chamber’s network of AmCham affiliates, which are foreign chambers of the Chamber composed of American and foreign companies. The Chamber quickly acknowledged that it receives direct, foreign money, but simply replied, “We are not obligated to discuss our internal procedures.” Instead of providing any documentation or proof to demonstrate foreign money is not being used for electioneering purposes, the Chamber launched an aggressive media strategy to first, attack ThinkProgress with petty name-calling and second, to confuse the media by highlighting the Chamber’s relatively minor AmCham fundraising, which the Chamber says (also without documentation) totals “approximately $100,000” from all 115 international AmCham chapters. The Chamber and the media largely ignored ThinkProgress’ revelation about the Chamber’s direct foreign fundraising to its 501(c)(6) used for attack ads.Yesterday, the Chamber’s chief lobbyist Bruce Josten, who has been spoon-feeding much of the media distortions about our report, went on Fox News (whose parent company donated $1 million to the Chamber recently for its ad campaign) to again try to dilute the issue by dissembling about the Chamber’s fundraising and membership. “We have probably 60 or so foreign multi-national companies in our membership that we have had for decades, many of which have been in the United States for half a century or a century,” said Josten.The Chamber is being deceptive. In addition to multinational members of the Chamber headquartered abroad (like BP, Shell Oil, and Siemens), a new ThinkProgress investigation has identified at least 83 other foreign companies that actively donate to the Chamber’s 501(c)(6). Below is a chart detailing the annual dues foreign corporations give directly to the Chamber.>Chamber Foreign Source Money Disclosure ~ Partial Disclosure List

  38. shiloh says:

    Continued:Again, all of these annual dues are collected in the same 501(c)(6) the Chamber is using to run partisan attack ads. The data above reflects information from public sources, and the Chamber likely has many more foreign corporations as dues-paying members — but refuses to divulge any of the funders for their ad campaign. Unfortunately, many reporters in the traditional press covered the Chamber story, but missed the entire point of our reporting. Most reporters (from the New York Times, McClatchy, the Associated Press, etc.) never contacted ThinkProgress, instead opting to only interview Chamber officials.Here’s how the Chamber’s unusual foreign fundraising operation works. According to this internal Chamber staff chart obtained by ThinkProgress, the Chamber has an international division devoted to promoting free trade and related policy issues. U.S. Chamber staffers, based here in Washington, D.C. with offices in the Chamber’s building at 1615 H Street, create bilateral “Business Councils” fundraising programs to solicit money from foreign corporations in Korea, Egypt, Brazil, Bahrain, India, and other places. For instance, the Chamber’s US-Egypt Business Council directs potential members to wire their checks to the US Chamber of Commerce. The application also notes that checks should be marked “ATTN: Leila Vossoughi.” Vossaoughi is a regular staffer at the Chamber. Promotions to join the Chamber have included promises that foreign firms obtain “access to the US Chamber of Commerce and everything that it does” and pledges to help the foreign firms promote free trade policies in America. All of the staffers who manage the Business Councils work directly for the Chamber. These Business Councils are nothing like the Chamber’s AmChams, which are foreign affiliates of the Chamber composed of American and foreign businesses abroad. Business Councils are based in the Chamber and even hosted on the U.S. Chamber’s website domain. Bylaws from the US-Bahrain Business Council confirm that the money the U.S. Chamber raises from these applications — which welcome foreign-owned businesses — goes into the Chamber’s 501(c)(6). Click below to see one such application: >Again, the information above documents the fact that foreign donations go directly to the Chamber without any intermediary, for instance, through an “AmCham” or another Chamber affiliate organization. The same Chamber account funded by these foreign corporation is running a $75 million attack campaign. In fact, a Chamber spokesperson acknowledged the foreign funds go into the Chamber’s general account. Any responsible reporter should have to note these direct donations given to the Chamber, which the Chamber has refused to discuss. Or, reporters should contact us directly if there is any confusion about our report.~~~~~

  39. filistro says:

    So… do we have a drinking game for the Delaware debate? 😉

  40. Mainer says:

    Ok who posted under my handle that I was about to off myself? Not me. I drive people to consider such actions but by long standing tradition will out live your sorry ass for spite….hey it worked for my gram.

  41. Mainer says:

    Name the terms dear lady. I do like drinking games…..if we play this right and get the right odds we could have some on the right blotto until way after the election…..hell they might even forget to vote ……or breath.

  42. filistro says:

    @Mainer Ok who posted under my handle that I was about to off myself?Just as I thought… now we have sockpuppets! We have officially become the old 538.Fortunately, most of us are hard to imitate…. and Mainer is definitely one of us :-)Warning.. If one of the regulars posts something that sounds weird or unlike them… ignore it. It’s just the kids having fun.

  43. shrinkers says:

    I just finally figured out what bothered me the most about Christine O’Donnell’s “I’m just like you” commercial. It is a celebration of her bigotry.Hear me out. Her argument is, “I’m just like you. Hell, I am you. I’m not one of those scary other people.”I mean really, hear the subtext. Vote for me, because I’m “like you.” I”m not unlike you. Like my opponent is. Like the President is. Like poor people are. Like those smart, elitist people are. I’m just like you. I don’t like people who are different, either.Am I wrong? Or is she forgiving — even endorsing — the idea of prejudice and bigotry?

  44. filistro says:

    This “debate” is making my teeth hurt.O’Donnell: “You’re just jealous ’cause YOU weren’t on Saturday night Live!”Verbatim. Good grief.

  45. filistro says:

    The Freepers weigh in on the debate:One brave soul complains (in the midst of hysterical praise for O’Donnell’s “spunky” performance:) Whether you care about this or not, Castle would have crushed Coons and given the GOP an immediate +1 pickup.He is instantly slapped down: Maybe, but then again, HE LOST. Isn’t that why we have primaries? Honestly, we (the Conservative movement) are better off with Coons in that seat than Mike Castle. Let the dividing line be sharp and clear; enough of the RINO party. Twenty subsequent posts loudly agree with the latter sentiment. I repeat:”Better off with Coons in that seat than Castle.” The Teaper brain at work (in its fashion.)

  46. shiloh says:

    @shrinkersO’Donnell is a frickin’ entertaining 😉 train wreck!But no, I would never waste time watching her debate, even if I lived in DE.Coincidentally, would never watch mama grizzly debate again after watching her embarrassing talkin’ point debate w/Biden.You never get a second chance to make a 1st impression …ie Nixon got 49.6% in ’60 and won by default (((w/43.4%))) in ’68 and of course by 1972 the Dems had totally imploded!Recent polls show DE’s fav witch w/38%. She lost to Biden 65/35 in 2008. Soooo as I said a month ago, if she gets 36% it will be a moral victory, especially since a high % of voters masturbate. 🙂

  47. shrinkers says:

    Recent polls show DE’s fav witch w/38%Please. Careful there. I know a whole bunch of witches. They’re great people. O’Donnell is no witch. Seriously.

  48. shiloh says:

    Are you a good witch or a bad witch?Actually, since Biden was a (36) year incumbent, it wouldn’t be a moral victory unless she got at least (40%). I believe she got 31k in the primary, so it will be interesting to see how much she improves in the general.>DE may be one state where Reps do, in fact, stay home if they think O’Donnell has (((zilch))) chance of winning, depending on the local races/issues on ballot, etc.

  49. shrinkers says:

    Christine O’Donnell asks voters to forget past remarks on religious, social issues http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Election-2010/From-the-Wires/2010/1013/Christine-O-Donnell-asks-voters-to-forget-past-remarks-on-religious-social-issuesTeapers not only embarrass the country. They embarrass themselves. Not even a Teaper would vote for a Teaper, if they actually listened to themselves.Why in all the worlds would anyone vote for these bozi? I mean really, honestly, truly, do any of them actually have anything to offer?

  50. Alki says:

    D. Patrick starting to surge in MASS.Poll: Tim Cahill defectors aided Deval PatrickPatrick 46%, Baker 39% and Cahill 10% in Suffolk U.-7News survey read more……….http://news.bostonherald.com/news/politics/view/20101013poll_tim_cahill_defectors_aided_deval_patrick/

  51. shiloh says:

    Speaking of teabaggers and shame lolAK-SEN: Miller’s campaign manager sez “We’re not the tea party candidate”This will come as news to the Tea Party Express, and to all the chumps who contributed the hundreds of thousands of dollars they pumped into Alaska, but Joe Miller’s campaign manager says Miller isn’t the tea party candidate.Last week, The MudFlats obtained an e-mail string between Miller and Todd Palin suggesting a rift between the Palins and their chosen one. Following up on that, they obtained another e-mail, this one an internal communication between Miller’s campaign fundraising chair, Seth Church, and his campaign manager, Robert Campbell.In the email, dated September 18, 2010, Church asks Campbell for suggested edits for a piece written for the campaign. Campbell returns the email telling Church, “We’re not the Tea Party candidate, so avoid that language…” This distancing, in which Miller’s Campaign Manager states specifically that he is “not the Tea Party candidate” and asks that Tea Party references not be used by the campaign, comes despite the staggering financial commitment, and clear positive effect that Tea Party money had for Miller’s candidacy. The support ultimately lead Miller from complete obscurity to primary victory over a tough incumbent opponent.~~~~~Pay no attention to the teabagger behind the curtain …

  52. Monotreme says:

    Nate has just posted up a new Senate forecast that gives the Democrats an 82% chance of holding on to a Senate majority.

  53. Bart DePalma says:

    Fili:90 seat wave? Sounds like you are playing the expectations game already.;)HuffPost was projecting a 60 to 70 seat gain yesterday. That is about right, maybe higher if some more of the safe seats flip.Venice was crowded, but the outlying islands were very nice.Ciao!

  54. WA7th says:

    Seattle Times plugs Nate in its discussion of the hogwash polling in our Senate race. As I commented over at 538, the only people who think Dino Rossi has a shot in Washington don’t live in Washington. The electorate hasn’t shifted, the polling has.

  55. shiloh says:

    @Bartlesplaying the expectations game already.~~~~~Speaking of expectations, how embarrassing for Republicans, if they can’t regain the House even w/a 7 er 8 to 1 nationwide $$$ advantage!solo dicendo>btw Bartles, did the pigeons shit on you 🙂 at San Marco Square.solo per curiositàciao Bartolo

  56. shrinkers says:

    Local crazy lady and Teaper darling Michelle Bachmann has raised over $10 million for her reelection campaign, a new record for a congressional race. Most of it, of course, is from out-of-state, and from extremely wealthy donors and special interests.The Teapers must really be scared if they think they need to raise that much money to re-elect an incumbent. Just sayin’.

  57. shrinkers says:

    @WA7thAn important quote from that article you linked from the Seattle Times: “There’s a clear enthusiasm gap this year,” Rasmussen said. “Republicans, by every measure, are more likely to show up and participate in this election.”Now we know how Ras constructs his “likely voter” model. He assumed Republicans are more likely to show up, so he overstates Republican support.There has never been any relationship demonstrated between enthusiasm and turnout. But Ras assumes there is a relationship anyway. And his assumption has been driving the narrative.There it is. He’s admitted it. On the strength of an unproven assumption, he is knowingly and intentionally misstating and misrepresenting his data.He may be right. He may be wrong. At the least, he is presenting an unsupported hypothesis as if it was hard, cold fact.Well, wingers never did have any respect for science. Or honesty, for that matter.

  58. GROG says:

    You know what they should do? They should have a poll every couple years and hold it like sometime in November. People can go to designated polling locations and actually vote for their preferred candidates. That way we know for certain who people want to be in office. We could hold it on say the first Tuesday of the month.I’ve been saying this for years.

  59. GROG says:

    shrinkers said:Well, wingers never did have any respect for science. Or honesty, for that matter.Do you make sweeping generalizations much? Now we know how Ras constructs his “likely voter” model. He assumed Republicans are more likely to show up, so he overstates Republican support.No, you don’t “know” that. You’re assuming that, but you don’t “know” that.Btw shrinkers, I’m fascinated by lefty posters like yourself. Pretty much all of your posts are Anti-Right. Don’t you have anything to say that is Pro-Left? I think this is why the Democratic Party is in shambles right now. They don’t stand FOR anything. They only stand AGAINST things. You have to tell people at some point in time what you LIKE instead of only what you don’t like. If this Anti-Right website is any indication of the future of the Democratic Party, you guys will be in trouble for a long time. The old 538 used to disucss left-wing ideas that could then be discussed and debated. IMO, this site would be much better if it had more of that.

  60. marc miwerdz says:

    Beverly said: “I wish we democrats were not so thin-skinned as to see every use of the word democrat that they think should be democratic as an insult”~~~~The question is,why, when it is historically more accurate,easier to say,and the preferred usage,NOT say democratic. The answer is simple.Our teaper friends wish to demean,trivialize and insult us with their chosen words.It is the same when they call medical review boards~death panels.Or enviormentalists `tree-huggers.Estate taxes become~ the death tax.Health care reform morphs into ‘obamacare’. They call the president`the messiah’.Long ago,liberals became`bleeding hearts’ I, like so many other democrats served in service to our country. I did it for many reasons, not the least was patriotism. I dont enjoy hearing them toss about words like communist and socialist.We all have to choose our battles. Some may sound trivial to others but allow me to draw my line in the sand.It is just something I have to stand-up to.

  61. shiloh says:

    @grogThat way we know for certain who people want to be in office.~~~~~hmm, kindergarten sarcasm aside, you mean like 2006 and 2008.And when are winger trolls, like yourself, Bartles et al, gonna stop crying/whining about said 2006/2008 elections?Rhetorical question.btw grog, I’ve never been fascinated by conservative apologists at liberal blogs, but sometimes you are entertaining by default! ;)take care, blessings

  62. shiloh says:

    @grogThey don’t stand FOR anything. They only stand AGAINST things.~~~~~After the past (2) years of total negativity by the I’m gonna take my ball and go home Republican party. !@#$%^&*Somehow, pot/kettle does not seem quite adequate. Again, as grog was one of many er all robot conservative trolls at the “old 538” who was 100% convinced HCR would not pass!Cry me a river …

  63. Michael Weiss says:

    GROG, you said”The old 538 used to disucss left-wing ideas that could then be discussed and debated. IMO, this site would be much better if it had more of that.”I’ve posted four such articles in the past month. How many of them have you participated in?Just sayin’

  64. Libertarian Hippie says:

    “How many of them have you participated in?”Can’t speak for GROG but you can’t get a word in amongst the back-slapping and anti-right bellowing constantly being flung by regulars like shrinkers, DC Petterson, and shiloh. Cut down on the noise and you might get some differing opinions to join. As it stand this is just another far left echo chamber reinforcing the nonsense of true believers.

  65. shiloh says:

    Kinda ironic libertarian hippie shows up just to make a derogatory drive by lol.Again LP, no one is forcing you to be here and you’re free to go back to redstate, malkin, drudge, freeperville at any time.btw, Bartles and Jeffrey don’t seem to have a problem, of course Bart is addicted as he needs a platform to gloat if the Reps do well next month and Jeffrey as well, but too early to say if he’s addicted.But thanx for sharing LP …take care

  66. filistro says:

    I believe several of the right wing regulars have been invited to submit blog articles for discussion.As yet, it appears none of them have done so. At websites, as in Congress, it seems the right finds it’s more fun to complain about the lack of discussion than make an effort to contribute to a productive discussion.(Apologies to those on the right who DO contribute, at least in comments. We appreciate you… and many of us make a point of saying so.)

  67. dr_funguy says:

    Grog, Since you haven’t been paying attention, here are a few things liberals are for:Universal health careending discrimination based on sexual preferencecampaign finance reformenergy independanceending the war on (some) drugsenvironmental protectionmom and apple pieGod and Country

  68. filistro says:

    I would like to add, about those righties who’ve been invited to contribute… if they decide to do so, it would make this site MORE bipartisan than the old 538, since I can’t recall Nate having any overtly right-leaning regular contributors… did he?

  69. filistro says:

    No comments on Pew’s research into cell phone bias and how much it favors Republicans?It looks significant.. confirming what a lot of us have been feeling this cycle.

  70. GROG says:

    Michael Weiss said:I’ve posted four such articles in the past month. How many of them have you participated in?I completely agree with you. You have written some excellent articles (I believe I did participate in Re-arranging the Economy. And your articles have resulted in some good dialogue. fili said:At websites, as in Congress, it seems the right finds it’s more fun to complain about the lack of discussion than make an effort to contribute to a productive discussion.I don’t mean to complain, I’m just trying to give some suggestions that may drive more traffic. I work in the private sector and my income is in no way derived from government subsidies, so I don’t have a lot of time to comment or write articles on blogs. (Man, that was a good dig). I do enjoy it when I can, though. How would we go about posting an article?

  71. shiloh says:

    @FiliI would like to add, about those righties who’ve been invited to contribute… if they decide to do so, it would make this site MORE bipartisan than the old 538, since I can’t recall Nate having any overtly right-leaning regular contributors… did he?~~~~~Indeed!Of course you know what the problem is ~ there just aren’t enough political blogs on the net 😉 as some conservatives can’t seem to find the right fit for their unique world view.Oh I’m sorry as that would be a winger echo chamber …>As mentioned previously, it’s just a lot more fun being a liberal, even when we’re in the minority, eh.that is all

  72. shrinkers says:

    GROG asked:Don’t you have anything to say that is Pro-Left? Sure. I am in favor of the repeal of DOMA and DADT. I am firmly in support of the new HCR law. I support the ARRA, and I would support a real additional stimulus. I support extending the tax cuts on people who make under $250,000, and allowing the cuts on incomes above that to expire. I support cap and trade. I support closing GITMO. You want more?I’m anti-right because you guys have simply been a roadblock.And as far as that goes, the Republicans in Congress have had no actual realistic proposals. They’ve had some talking points (tax cuts, smaller government, tort reform, etc.) with no actual suggestions that would actually help address America’s problems.

  73. Michael Weiss says:

    Libertarian Hippie says:”Cut down on the noise and you might get some differing opinions to join. As it stand this is just another far left echo chamber reinforcing the nonsense of true believers.”I see a chicken-and-egg issue here. If you participated, you’d change that dynamic. I, for one, not only welcome but very much desire some well-reasoned conservative participants.And perhaps fewer partisan attacks from the left side of the aisle, too.

  74. filistro says:

    @GROG: How would we go about posting an article?I don’t know for sure… you have to talk to Mr. U or Monotreme, who are in charge of the material that actually appears onsite.I do think, in regard to your comments on excessive partisanship, that it will all get less intense after the election. When the World Series is coming up in the next few days, nobody really wants to discuss next year’s defensive trades, or whether MLB should adopt instant replay.They’re all out getting their faces painted with their team colors (and, unfortunately, often their tummies as well… 😉

  75. filistro says:

    Somebody at Nate’s site just said that since 1945, the House and Senate have always flipped together.All you political historians.. is that true? If so, it makes a Dem hold of the House look more likely, since the Senate is not going to flip.

  76. mclever says:

    Grog: To submit an article, send the text to Monotreme or Mr. Universe. I believe they are the two with moderator privileges at this point.If I’m wrong, please feel free to correct me!

  77. shortchain says:

    I applaud the effort to get us some fresh meat, er, an article by GROG, Jeff, or Bart, on a subject of their choice, I’d advise them to expect it to be received to skeptical, if appreciative, comments. At a minimum, if they research their topic with the effort that Michael (not to trammel on the efforts of others, but just as an example) I’m sure it will be interesting and educational for all concerned.

  78. shiloh says:

    @Filiit will all get less intense after the election.~~~~~Sorry Fili, but the exact opposite will happen ie scorched earth as look at how the Rep party has been operating the past (20) years, especially the last (2) ie faux, astro-turf, funded by disgruntled conservative billionaire, hatespeak yahoo teabaggers.My way or the highway and this is when Reps are the minority. If they take control of the House it’s Katy bar the door!The sore loser Reps will want payback and this will be especially true on the net where passive/aggressive behavior is the norm ie Bartles et al disingenuous sarcasm when they’re in the minority.Did I mention Reps are really sore losers.And did I also mention liberals often disagree …

  79. Libertarian Hippie says:

    “fewer partisan attacks”Bingo! Unfortunately nearly every conservative-leaning comment I see on here gets flogged and flamed with biting sarcasm and accusations of bigotry and evildoing. Or a grandiose conspiracy theory is proposed that paints anyone that leans right as a greedy liar trying to regain power at all costs. shrinkers is usually good for one or two of those each post. There is no sense in participating unless most of that stuff is cleared out.

  80. Libertarian Hippie says:

    And shiloh provided the perfect example of what I’m talking about.

  81. DC Petterson says:

    @filistroSomebody at Nate’s site just said that since 1945, the House and Senate have always flipped together.All you political historians.. is that true? If so, it makes a Dem hold of the House look more likely, since the Senate is not going to flip.Hmmmm… An excellent point. Nate is now giving the Republicans an 18% chance to take the Senate, and giving the Democrats a 28% chance to hold the House. The D’s House odds have dropped by 5% since my article on Oct 8, and their Senate chances have improved by 4%. Both of these are small movements, perhaps within the MoE.So it appears the Dems have about an 80%, give or take a few percent, of holding the Senate, and about a 30% chance, give or take, of holding the House. That’s not bad at all for a first midterm after some historic victories. With all the problems in polling we’ve discussed, I’d expect the Democrats to do slightly better than Nate’s current predictions. “Slightly better” would probably be enough to hold both chambers. Nate’s predicting the Democrats will end up with 208.5 seats. They’d only need an additional 9.5 to hold a slim majority there — only about 2% of the House (which is probably a meaningless statistic — the point is, it really isn’t all that much).My hope would be for the Democrats in the Senate to find their collective spine after this election, and start actually enacting the legislation that We the People sent them there to do. Stop caving to the Republicans. The Dems are in trouble this year, mostly to the extent that they’ve allowed Republicans to roadblock meaningful progress. It’s time to move forward.

  82. GROG says:

    fili said:I do think, in regard to your comments on excessive partisanship….Actually, I don’t mind the partisanship. My point is that there is rarely any discussion on the partisan issues.Shrinkers and dr funguy can recite a list of issues they believe, but they have no discussion about the issues to offer. They go off on how Republicans are a bunch of lying racists.

  83. shiloh says:

    If Reps do well next month, some of the former 538 conservative trolls will drop by just long enough to gloat.Human nature for totally obsessed Reps.Like libertarian hippie’s drive-by, but hopefully w/a little more flair. 😉 They will go into their ad nauseam I told you so meme (((If Reps take the House))) which again will be soooo ironic after (8) years of cheney/bush FUBAR’ing America.Did I mention politics is a contact sport, especially on the web lol.and so it goes …

  84. filistro says:

    @ LH.. There is no sense in participating unless most of that stuff is cleared out.So what do you want? Be specific.Nobody gets to issue body checks? Only one side gets to body check, and the other side must do light chest taps? Both sides issue light chest taps, but must say “excuse me” while doing so?I’m confused as to how you would run the site if you were allowed to make the rules.

  85. Realist says:

    @Libertarian HippieMy approach is to respond to partisan attacks, to the extent that I do at all, with considered, well-reasoned responses. It doesn’t take long to make the other side look like a bozo when you do.

  86. DC Petterson says:

    @shilohAnd did I also mention liberals often disagree …No, we don’t. You’re just wrong.

  87. Housekeeping says:

    Cleaning up the bolds….

  88. filistro says:

    DC… you’re WRONG about shiloh being wrong. If you keep being so regrettably lacking in sweetness and light, LH will dissect you like a salmon.

  89. shrinkers says:

    Unbolding.

  90. filistro says:

    Checking to see if two unbolds make a new bold…

  91. shiloh says:

    @DCNo, we don’t. You’re just wrong.~~~~~Indeed lol and all you have to do is look at this thread ie “we” are arguing about arguing. ;)Oh the humanity!At the political forum I used to frequent, there were many calm down periods where everyone had to take a break. Sometimes (3) days and once for a whole wk! It was a reality tv site and many peeps wanted the Current Affairs forum closed down.It was devil’s advocate heaven! :)I digress.<<>>

  92. shrinkers says:

    I must be doing something well, for both LH and GROG to single me out as an effective counter to the right wing spin.GROG, if you’d like to discuss policy, I’m game. I’d love it. Pick a topic. I listed a bunch of things I support — anything there strike your fancy?I’d also discuss Star Trek (original series was the best, followed by DS9, the newest movie kicks ass), Lord of the Rings, religion, medieval history, Linux, SQL databases, and my new smartphone.

  93. Libertarian Hippie says:

    “if you were allowed to make the rules.”Simple. Moderate the excessively partisan rants. One or two posts to blow off steam is one thing but when 90% of what you say isn’t issue related but just bashing the other guy, the only people that wanna listen are those that think just like you. Hence the echo chamber.So moderate the excessive partisanship or live with the fact that you won’t get much right-leaning participation and the dozen or so of you that are regulars here can keep giving each other high-fives uninterrupted.

  94. shiloh says:

    the gobbledygook at the bottom of my last post should have said “rechecking all my tags” ;)carry on

  95. Libertarian Hippie says:

    Effective counter to right wing spin?Effective promoter of left wing spin maybe.

  96. shiloh says:

    As long as Libertarian Hippie doesn’t threaten to kill any of us, we should be ok.Just sayin’

  97. filistro says:

    LH… again I ask… what are you complaining about? You don’t want anybody here to express left-wing viewpoints? Or do you want any left-wing view to be balanced by an alternate view from the right? If so, who shoud express that alterate view… teh left-wing commenter, or somebody actually from the right?You are puzzling me. I honestly don’t know what your objection is. Do you just want everybody to “play nice”? Because your posts sound… you know… quite combative 😉

  98. filistro says:

    Sorry, LH… didn’t see your post at 9:56.So… you want the site manager to censor opinion? Is that right?

  99. Libertarian Hippie says:

    Wow talk about being flamed. Complain about excessive partisanship and accused of terrorism and possibly murder? That does it. If the people responsible for moderating comments can’t filter an accusation that vile out then there are much better places to be.

  100. filistro says:

    @LH.. If the people responsible for moderating comments can’t filter an accusation that vile out then there are much better places to be.Bye Muley. (I still like you 🙂

  101. Michael Weiss says:

    Libertarian Hippie,Might I suggest that you participate in discussion on policy? That’s not what this particular thread is for, but we have several others from which to choose…

  102. Mainer says:

    Hmmmmm and as long as we play by LH Republican rules and only allow their partisan rants we will have shown the same restraint that has made congress such a pleasant and productive place. Besdes if we limit partisan rants Bart will be left with nothing but his name and salutation of the day on all his posts and that would not be fair.I need to read that PEW piece on cell phones. My wife and I have been updating the Rolladex (yes some of us fossils still use a Rolladex) and I have been amazed at how many of my contact numbers are now just cell numbers. Interestingly of 12 houses on my street 7 are now primarily cell users and only have land line for computer access. Even more amazing is that they can get enough of a signal to make it work at all. Life in the sticks….gotta love it.

  103. Libertarian Hippie says:

    “you want the site manager to censor opinion?”Since you at least attempt to find middle ground filistro I will answer your question. Yes to an extent I want opinions censored. Do not most places that allow commentary do that nowadays? Allow people to say what they feel but in a respectful way. Play nice as you say.

  104. Alki says:

    Filistro, I got a comment posted but they took out the link to this site. I guess they are paranoid. ;-)BTW this thread is mucho popular.

  105. Libertarian Hippie says:

    “Might I suggest that you participate in discussion on policy?”Sorry I will leave now. If a comment like the one shiloh made is allowed to stand without moderation or condemnation from the group I have no business being here. Good day.

  106. shiloh says:

    @LHthere are much better places to be.~~~~~Indeed!Which begs the question:Why does disgruntled Mule er Michael er Shots er Undeniable er Libertarian Hippie and my fav shilohbuster 🙂 ever come here at all.Is he lonely …

  107. filistro says:

    @Alki… BTW this thread is mucho popular.It sure is. You’re an absolute genius. I would never have thought of it, but I LOVE this thread. :-)Bummer re the link at NYT…. (and thanks for trying.) It seems kind of dog-in-the-manger, doesn’t it? They post… what… 20 comments over an entire weekend, but they don’t want anybody coming to chat over here.

  108. mclever says:

    shrinkers: I’d also discuss Star Trek (original series was the best, followed by DS9, the newest movie kicks ass), Lord of the Rings, religion, medieval history, Linux, SQL databases, and my new smartphone.I’m with you there on any of those topics except the new smartphone. What did you think of Joss Whedon’s Firefly series? Did you even see it before it went off the air?;-)Back on topic, I think Nate’s analysis shows that the numbers are starting to solidify a little. As should be expected in a midterm, voters are mostly venting their anger in the House races, but the majority of the Senate looks relatively secure. There’s still a lot of work to be done by partisans interested in affecting the election, because things can certainly change in a couple of weeks, but we’ve basically arrived at what I expected waaayyyyy back in the beginning of this cycle…During an economic downturn, you can generally count on voters to vote against who ever is currently in charge (regardless of actual progress on fixing the problems), so I expect(ed) a significant swing in the House. But I will be surprised if the Dems lose the Senate, though it should be close to 1 or 2 votes either way.

  109. shiloh says:

    Libertarian Hippie er MuleLive long and prosper!>Beam me up Scottie, there’s no intelligent life in this thread. 🙂

  110. Michael Weiss says:

    Libertarian Hippie, I’m not in a position to moderate, and I’m not one to condemn people’s posts. If they have something of substance to contribute, I’ll respond.You asked some questions of substance, and I responded to them. To suggest that my advice to you is somehow a suggestion that you don’t belong here indicates that you either have very thin skin or came here to pick a fight.You have an opportunity to shape the direction of this site, as does everyone else who shows up.The danger in moderation, incidentally, is that it can easily lead to one of two destinations, neither of which is desirable. One would look much like NYT, where nearly every post is a drive-by. The other would look much like Free Republic, which is nothing but an echo chamber.A free for all, while not perfect, can be a lively place.

  111. mclever says:

    Libertarian Hippie,If you were truly libertarian, then you would oppose all moderation and censorship as that would be interference in the free flow of information and restrictions on free speech.That said, the initial premise of this site has ALWAYS been that there would be no moderation. Only spammers and death threats would be deleted.If you don’t like unmoderated discussion, then I suppose this isn’t the place for you. However, I would posit that of the multitudinous unmoderated and moderated sites available, this is actually one of the tamer/saner ones. There are occasional partisan rants, but people generally get called on it, from both sides. In case you missed it, three “liberal” posters ganged up on another for being too hard on a conservative poster a couple of threads ago. So, I do NOT think this is as much of an echo chamber as you make it out to be.:-)

  112. GROG says:

    fili said:BTW this thread is mucho popular.You’re welcome. 🙂

  113. mclever says:

    I’ll also add that this particular thread is an “election” thread which tends to bring out the cheerleading.The other issues-based threads have had more substantive conversations, and even the occasional notes of agreement between voices at either extreme.

  114. filistro says:

    @GROG… LOL.Yes, for a caveman you can be very… what’s the word? Provocative? (No, there’s that whole clubbing-on-the-head thing. Not really provocative.)Stirring? (Not sure. What’s in that big stone kettle, anyhow? It smells awful.)Inciteful? (Oh, definitely. I’ll also give you “insightful” since you were smart enough to learn how to start fires… and still are 😉

  115. shiloh says:

    three “liberal” posters ganged up on anotherhmm, define ganged up on ;)btw, as mentioned before, at the reality site mentioned above, joined because of Big Brother as I was a capping streaming video fool back in the day, but noticed in the Current Affairs forum that many of the posters really, really didn’t like each other and thought, I should fit right in …

  116. mclever says:

    shiloh hmm, define ganged up on ;)Well, on this site:”ganged up on” v. Three or more persons presenting a united yet subdued disagreement, chastisement, or condemnation of another. Generally phrased politely with smileys and caveats. Sarcasm filters may or may not be applied.;-)

  117. shrinkers says:

    Bummer re the link at NYT.I made a NYT post that included a link to the Seattle paper, and the nixed the whole post. I think they just are now tending to dump links altogether.

  118. Alki says:

    @ filistro”Bummer re the link at NYT…. (and “thanks for trying.) It seems kind of dog-in-the-manger, doesn’t it? They post… what… 20 comments over an entire weekend, but they don’t want anybody coming to chat over here.”**************************************The funny thing is I thought I was being extra clever by slipping the url in the sentence rather than showing it separately. Obviously I am not as clever as I think. LOL.As for this thread, you were the one who pushed for it. Kudos to you.

  119. Mule Rider says:

    Well well well. Looky what I found…the same ol’ chumps I used to torment back at the original fivethirtyeight.com.

  120. Mule Rider says:

    You guys want a crystal ball prediction for this election?Republicans control the House by a 230-205 margin. Dems retain the Senate with a 52 (including 2 Indis)-48 margin.

  121. filistro says:

    MULEY!!! You’re here!I have to hurry and give you a (((HUG))) before you do something terrible and get kicked out. :-)Nice to see you. What numbers are you calling for in the Senate and the House?

  122. filistro says:

    LOL… great minds, Muley. You posted while I was asking.

  123. Mule Rider says:

    A prediction beyond that?The Dems continue to be punished as the “party in charge” the next couple of years and more and more people see Obama for the miserable failure that he is and he’s voted out in 2012, so long as it’s not Sarah Booger-Eating Dumbass Palin that’s his primary challenger.

  124. Mule Rider says:

    Nice to see you too, filistro.

  125. Mule Rider says:

    You are a very sweet, albeit misguided, soul.

  126. filistro says:

    @Muley so long as it’s not Sarah Booger-Eating Dumbass Palin that’s his primary challenger.Yes, it really IS Muley. I’m so happy.Now I wish today weren’t my bowling day. Muley, try to not get kicked out before I’m back, okay?

  127. Mule Rider says:

    Since I’m such a prolific commenter, we’re going to test the limits on what this thing can handle. This thing doesn’t revert to the “dark side” after 200, does it?

  128. shiloh says:

    MulePlease define torment

  129. shiloh says:

    Mule & FilistroGet a room!Just sayin’

  130. Mule Rider says:

    “Muley, try to not get kicked out before I’m back, okay?”That shouldn’t be a problem. Just perusing the above discussion, there doesn’t seem to be any…ahem…”political will” to shut off discussion so long as it’s not spam or threatening. The response to LH’s request for moderation was shot down to protect free speech and flow of information of ideas. They wouldn’t go against that just to shut me up, would they??I mean, we don’t want to be caught being hypocritical around here, do we?

  131. filistro says:

    Muley has long been a favorite of mine 🙂 He was the very first person I ever spoke with at old 538, more than 2 years ago.

  132. Mule Rider says:

    “Please define torment …”Calling you out nonstop for being a petulant and annoying ass-maggot and making you think twice before running your little smart-ass trip at me from that little shithole you call a home in Kent, OH.

  133. Mule Rider says:

    trip = trapAwwww, filistro, you remembered me from soooo long ago….how sweet!!

  134. shiloh says:

    Mule keep in mind that one cannot delete posts.take care, blessings

  135. Mule Rider says:

    Did I mention I’m prolific???Ha! I’d love to be a fly on Mr. Universe’s wall to hear the heavy sigh he lets out when he logs on and sees my shit strewn all over his site.

  136. Mule Rider says:

    “Mule keep in mind that one cannot delete posts.”Uh, thanks for the tip…and this affects me how?

  137. Mule Rider says:

    I won’t come around too often, but when I do, just go ahead an expect me to account for about 2/3rds of the posts on any given thread. I know that sounds delightful to most of you.(pretty sure a head just exploded in the Minneapolis area)

  138. Mule Rider says:

    Just playin’ with ya shrinkers…but you’re still a weasly little turd.

  139. shiloh says:

    filistro, when you and Mule get that room together, be sure to give your buddy Mule a big juicy kiss for me!TIA

  140. Mule Rider says:

    Don’t project your fantasies onto filistro there, shiloh. I know that’s what you’re lusting after with that homoerotic bi-curious thing you got goin’ on…

  141. shiloh says:

    Mule thanx for not disappointing w/your lame comeback.Just like old times, eh.take care, blessings

  142. Mule Rider says:

    Lame comeback? For recognizing you as a quasi-turd burgling wannabe butt pirate doing your smooching vicariously through a sweet little old grandmother? Oh you can do better than that!

  143. Mule Rider says:

    “thanx for not disappointing”And you’re welcome for the slams that meet your own approval!”Just like old times, eh.”Just like old times indeed.

  144. Mule Rider says:

    I’ve admired shiloh for one thing. Not many people I know can type with both hands on their pecker. Now that’s what I call a keystroke!!Bad-a-bing!! Thank you! Thanks you! (bowing) I’m here all week!!

  145. shiloh says:

    Mule, if you’re going to make a 24/7 fool of yourself, please use spell check …Just trying to be helpful. 🙂

  146. Mule Rider says:

    Trust me, you’re far better at moronics and embarrassing yourself than I could ever dream to be, even with a few typos slowing me down.

  147. shrinkers says:

    Hey, Mule.Welcome here. You make me look positively polite in comparison :)Actually, when you discuss issues, I like talking with you. When you descend to the gutter, I don’t bother. Always your choice, my friend.

  148. Alki says:

    @ shrinkers………I made a NYT post that included a link to the Seattle paper, and the nixed the whole post. I think they just are now tending to dump links altogether.***************************************Good to hear they don’t discriminate. 😉

  149. Mule Rider says:

    “positively polite in comparison”Oh, I have no argument that you got me there. But on the delusional, paranoia, fantastical, conspiratorial front, I’m miles ahead of you in the sane department. The choice, it would appear, is between being a kind nut and a misanthropic intellect.

  150. dr_funguy says:

    First, you asked for statements of what liberals are for, or at least I interpreted it that way. I really don’t have time for more right now, I have work to do. I have at time supported some of these concepts with links to data which you ignore in favor of your next non sequitor.Second, I don’t recall saying that “Republicans are a bunch of lying racists”.

  151. Mule Rider says:

    Outside of health care, you’re not going to find many people more informed (or correct) than me on any issue.

  152. Jeff says:

    DC Petterson said: “Short version — even the Teapers are coming to realize that at least half of them are whores, being bought by extremely wealthy sugar daddies who don’t believe a word of the anti-elitist rhetoric.”==============Please spare me the rhetoric. It has about as much validity as saying that the other side has a bunch of people who live on welfare or get paychecks from the government.

  153. Mule Rider says:

    Liberals are for…killing babiesimmediately ending all fossil fuel useimmediately ending loggingheavy regulations on what we eat and drinktaxing the wealthy back to middle class status or lower100% inheritance taxesperpetually giving handouts to the poor without questionproviding health care without concern for costcomplete de-militarization of the USamnesty for illegal aliens with no repercussionspromoting a homosexual lifestyle as superior to a heterosexual oneremoving any mention of God from the public

  154. Mule Rider says:

    And if you’re offended by my sweeping generalization and over-the-top strawman of what liberals stand for, consider how conservatives feel when we’re defined as standing for…making rape victims carry babies to termpolluting the earth till it’s rottendeforestationending the FDA and taking away all food saftey regsfavoring the wealthy in all tax measuressnubbing the poor and actively trying to demoralize them furtherdenying health care to people who truly need itjingoism and warmongeringanything anti-Hispanichating gaystrying to install a theocracy and force people to follow a Christian God

  155. Jeff says:

    filistro wrote:The Freepers weigh in on the debate:One brave soul complains (in the midst of hysterical praise for O’Donnell’s “spunky” performance Whether you care about this or not, Castle would have crushed Coons and given the GOP an immediate +1 pickup.He is instantly slapped down:Maybe, but then again, HE LOST. Isn’t that why we have primaries? Honestly, we (the Conservative movement) are better off with Coons in that seat than Mike Castle. Let the dividing line be sharp and clear; enough of the RINO party.Twenty subsequent posts loudly agree with the latter sentiment. I repeat: “Better off with Coons in that seat than Castle.” The Teaper brain at work (in its fashion.)================As you know, I also think “O’Donnell is an embarrassment and a joke, and would have loved to have seen Castle win.But since I don’t understand the liberal mindset, perhaps you can explain the practical difference between the right opposing Castle, who is moderately right of center, and the left opposing Lieberman, who is a doctrinaire liberal on every issue except foreign policy? Or Lincoln, who is about as far left as could possibly be elected in Arkansas.Is it irrational to oppose RINO’s, but rational to oppose DINO’s?Just asking — this poor winger’s brain just doesn’t get the intellectual difference….

  156. Jeff says:

    We interrupt our various rants to return this thread to politics…..============I just made an over/under bet with a (very conservative) friend that the results would be 45 House seats and 7 Senate seats. I took the under….I’ve also posted before that the ideal outcome for the Republicans would be 35 House seats and 8 Senate seats. Why?Massive blowouts in mid-term elections usually result in the other party winning the White House the next time around. Examples are 1946, followed by Truman in ’48, 1994 followed by Clinton in ’96.A widely accepted, non-political analysis of the current economic situation is that things aren’t going to get much better for at least two years, and probably five, no matter what policies are followed. My personal preference is for the Democratic party to continue owning the House and Senate and White House, so that there is a clear choice in 2012. If you believe that the best thing for the country is pruning government, becoming fiscally responsible, and undoing some of the current monstrosities, then you need to own the White House to avoid the veto and the need for a 2/3rds majority in each chamber. And if that isn’t reason enough, I can’t imagine how much fun it would be to watch Nancy Pelosi try to deal with a 4-seat majority….. 🙂

  157. Mainer says:

    Gee its muleville again…..how nice. Mule man lets consider parts of your list:killing babies> And you have heard which non regresives on here advocate this? Beleiving government not being in our homes and bed rooms as well as a woman’s right to choice isn’t quite the same thing. Also keep in mind that most progressives believe strongly in limiting pregnancies that could end in an abortion……your side not so much.immediately ending all fossil fuel use> Can’t happen. T. Boone has it right and I doubt he is a Democrat.immediately ending logging> Not around here. Logging done right will leave us with sustainable forests for generations. Some stands need protection but we still need lumber and fiber.heavy regulations on what we eat and drink> Not sure where you are on this one. I lik eating safe food. There are many things in our food chain that is not very good for us so we should not expect clean food?????taxing the wealthy back to middle class status or lower> Bullshit. How about we try not to end up with 2% of the population controling 90+% of the nation’s wealth and no middle class left.If being taxed as little more than is projected is going to do them in then they are already nothing but an economic house of cards.100% inheritance taxes> Nothing that has been put out there but again when the system is stacked so that fewer and fewer people control more and more of the wealth this nation is in serious trouble and don’t trot out family farms and chapter S business or the bullshit flag will fly again.perpetually giving handouts to the poor without question>And we should do what with the poor……oh I know lets do away with the minimum wage and make more of the. There has to be better answers Mule but I haven’t seen much that would look to do much positiv.providing health care without concern for cost>You have some reading to do on here to catch up. HC has to be addressed and how does the Republicans propose to fix it?complete de-militarization of the US> Bullshit again Mule. Wanting a cost effective military and then not wasting it on crap like Iraq would be a good start.amnesty for illegal aliens with no repercussions>To be honest I have no idea what to do and it seems few others do either.But whacking business that is playing the system would be a good starting place.promoting a homosexual lifestyle as superior to a heterosexual one>Who in bloody hell has advocated that. No, recognizing that there are productive citizens around us that happen to be homosexuals and thinking productive citizens all should have equal opportunities….yes.removing any mention of God from the public>Don’t confuse ACLU zealots for progressives. Oh and actually beleiving in the constitution and seperation of church and state isn’t the same thing.

  158. Realist says:

    @Jeff,perhaps you can explain the practical difference between the right opposing Castle, who is moderately right of center, and the left opposing Lieberman, who is a doctrinaire liberal on every issue except foreign policy?Perhaps you can explain to me the relationship between the public health insurance option and foreign policy. It’s not evident to me.Besides that, for me the final straw was when he campaigned for John McCain. When it comes to the Presidency, I don’t care how you feel about the person, you either campaign for the one representing your party (in this case, the one you’re caucusing with), or you stay silent.And it’s interesting to note that even RINOs were joining in on the Republican filibusters, while the DINOs were not joining in on breaking them.So I’d chalk it up to degree of INO.

  159. Alki says:

    PPP is reporting that in most races the Undecideds are no longer a big factor, meaning they’ve gone home. Not good news for Dems.http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/10/4-races-where-undecideds-matter.html

  160. Mule Rider says:

    Mainer,Sorry for any confusion but that list was posted with tongue planted firmly in cheek. It was done not to illustrate what I believe are mainstream opinions on the Left (although I’d argue that there are a select few that truly believe some of the extreme positions I put forth) but juxtapose them against the extreme accusations of what the Right supposedly stands for. For example, I don’t really belive the mainstream liberal position is to end all logging, but do people really believe the mainstream conservative position is to promote rampant deforestation? And on down the line with ridiculous assertions with what one side says the other believes.

  161. Alki says:

    @ Jeff………When you talk about liberals vs conservatives, I think its important to note that most policians in the US, including Obama, are placed right of center on most polical spectrums. There are few true liberals in this country.That’s all I will say on the topic because this really is not the board for these kinds of political theory discussions.

  162. Mule Rider says:

    “There are few true liberals in this country.”Bullshit. Usually 20%-25% self-identifies as “liberal” and we always here how that number is actually higher but people stick with moderate/indi/conservative labels because they haven’t been tarnished the way the word liberal has. I don’t consider one-quarter to one-third (or more) of the population to be “few.”Oh, and please stop repeating the tripe that Obama is right of center on the political spectrum, even if that has a semblance of truth compared to world standards. My feelings are that we shouldn’t be using world standards to measure politicians in the US. But that’s just me. YMMV.

  163. Jeff says:

    Realist wrote:@Jeff,perhaps you can explain the practical difference between the right opposing Castle, who is moderately right of center, and the left opposing Lieberman, who is a doctrinaire liberal on every issue except foreign policy?Perhaps you can explain to me the relationship between the public health insurance option and foreign policy. It’s not evident to me.Besides that, for me the final straw was when he campaigned for John McCain. ===============1. Foreign policy differences is your explanation for Lieberman being opposed by the left. OK, how about Lincoln? How about Bennet in Colorado? Both incumbents who are fairly liberal, but not liberal enough.2. Lieberman campaigned for McCain (after the left ran him out of the party), because he felt foreign policy outweighed domestic policy as a concern. Remember, that was pre-meltdown.I’m still wondering where the difference is between challenging a Republican from the right, vs. challenging a Republican from the left.

  164. Jeff says:

    Umm, last post should be asking the difference between challenging a Republican from the right, vs. a DEMOCRAT from the left.Oops!

  165. Jeff says:

    Interesting pice of news:Barack Obama is no longer the big man on campus.College students’ support for the President is waning — a worrying sign for Democrats who are trying to reenergize young voters before the midterm elections, which are just three weeks away.Just 44% approve of the job Obama is doing, while 27% said they are unhappy with his job performance, according to a new Associated Press-mtvU poll.That’s a significant dip from the 60% who gave the president high marks in a May 2009 poll. Only 15% of college goers had a negative opinion of him back then.And if 2008 is any indication, the Democrats need young voters. During that presidential race, nearly one in eight voters cast their ballots for the first time. Exit polls showed 55% of new voters were age 18-24, and those young first-timers strongly supported the Democrats.Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/10/14/2010-10-14_president_barack_obamas_support_among_college_students_waning_before_2010_midter.html?r=news#ixzz12N8w1I4a===========In other words, his + 45 rating among college students in 2008 is now down to +17. And nobody thinks students are going to turn out in the numbers they did two years ago.The question is bound to come up — WHY are college kids turning against Obama?I’m sure there are many possible reasons, but the one I like is that they’re two years older and two years better educated…. 🙂

  166. filistro says:

    @Jeff… Just asking — this poor winger’s brain just doesn’t get the intellectual difference….Will it help if I speak ve-r-r-r-r-y slowly? ;-)The difference between Dems opposing Lieberman from the left, and Freeper-Teapers supporting O’Donnell over Castle?Dems opposing Lieberman from the left would rather have a real Dem who can win than an opportunistic shape-shifter who antagonizes many on his own side.Freeper-Teapers supporting O’Donnell would rather have an idiot who CAN’T WIN but shares their ideology than a moderate Republican who CAN win.The purpose of elections, you see, is not to display your ideological purity. The purpose is to win…and then govern. (No wonder people on the right have trouble with that. Governing is such an alien concept to them.)

  167. shortchain says:

    filistro,Jeff’s problem is that he didn’t understand that, when Joe Lieberman lost the primary, that didn’t mean a significantly reduced probability of sending a Democrat to Congress. Ned Lamont was almost certainly going to be elected in blue-as-blue Ct.Whereas, in virtually every case in which the TP has primaried sitting Republicans, the probability of winning the seat for the GOP has been reduced or eliminated.Remember, the goal is to produce the most worthwhile candidate for your side who can be elected.

  168. shiloh says:

    @JeffreyLieberman campaigned for McCain (after the left ran him out of the party)~~~~~hmm, Lieberman still caucuses w/the Dems.Jeffrey, hyperbole is never very effective in political debate, especially when it is totally inaccurate!btw, Lieberman lost the CT primary in a fair election as do many other Dems, but he is one of the very few Dems, after being rejected by the voters in his own party to then run as an Indy, which was his decision alone.Again, why doesn’t he caucus w/Reps if he feels soooo rejected, eh.Rhetorical question.take care, blessings

  169. Realist says:

    @Jeff,Foreign policy differences is your explanation for Lieberman being opposed by the left.No. It was your explanation, as quoted here:the left opposing Lieberman, who is a doctrinaire liberal on every issue except foreign policyMy explanation is that he is clearly not a doctrinaire liberal on non-foreign-policy issues.Lincoln and Bennett? Not much on my radar, one way or the other. I’ll happily let others speak about them.Campaigning for a Republican President is unacceptable for any Democrat, ever. Just as I would expect Republicans to find any Republican campaigning for a Democrat for President to be unacceptable. There’s a time and place for doctrine to take precedence. That’s not one of those times or places.

  170. Mr. Universe says:

    Beverly said;“i wish we democrats weren’t so thin-skinned as to see every use of the word “democrat” that we think should be “democratic” as an insult”It is an intentional perjorative. I think Limbaugh conjured it up. One thing that it does do is immediately identify those on the extreme right who are hostile towards the Democrat Party.

  171. Alki says:

    @ Jeff……..”The question is bound to come up — WHY are college kids turning against Obama?”****************************************First of all, half those college students were not even in college two years ago when their support of Obama was at its all time high. Secondly, college students are the most receptive to change but expect it to happen overnite. When it doesn’t they become frustrated and disillusioned.Thirdly, they are not immune to the negativity surrounding Obama these days. Its become popular to take a pot shot at the president from both sides of the aisle. That too will change. Nonetheless, they still come out in throngs when he makes an appearance on a campus and they will vote.

  172. Mr. Universe says:

    Mule Rider said;Ha! I’d love to be a fly on Mr. Universe’s wall to hear the heavy sigh he lets out when he logs on and sees my shit strewn all over his site.Weeellll, look who finally found us. The Rider of Asses himself. Welcome to the party, you old scoundrel. Don’t worry, I promised everyone that I wouldn’t kick you out unless you start that “gut you like a fish’ stuff. But it’s kind of nice to wield the power of moderation over you if I so choose. BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

  173. shiloh says:

    Since Mr. U mentioned Beverly again, I’ll repost my agreement to her reply which went to moderationville yesterday:@BeverlyI wish we democrats weren’t so thin-skinned~~~~~Indeed, which is why I’m a liberal independent. ;)Again, some peeps were upset in 2009 when Bartles, Rudy, Grog, Jeff, MPM, and the rest of 538’s trollish merry men 🙂 called HCR Obamacare.This after all of 2008 Obama was called Communist, Socialist, Marxist, Islamo-Fascist, Satan, The Devil Incarnate, The Anti-Christ, a Muslim born in Kenya, who wakes up every morning hating America and Americans yada yada yada lolSoooo when Bartles et al frequently used Obamacare one just had to smile knowing he was easily elected the 44th President of the United States of America! :)Perspective people.btw, Bartles and the rest of 538’s winger trolls were 100% sure health care reform would never pass.Oops! Never say never.>You can call me Ray or you can call me Jay …

  174. shrinkers says:

    Mr. UIt is an intentional perjorative. I think Limbaugh conjured it up.I distinctly recall Republicans using that back in the 60s. Limbaugh has no imagination.

  175. shiloh says:

    <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-p-mcdonald/early-voting-off-to-a-fas_b_763074.html“>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-p-mcdonald/early-voting-off-to-a-fas_b_763074.htmlEarly Voting Off to a Fast Start in Democratic Areas of OhioOhioans have been casting their ballots for the 2010 midterm elections since September 28th. Voters in other states have also begun casting their ballots. By and large, these ballots are dribbling in, as they typically do so soon in the early voting period. Early voting usually begins to pick up pace as the election nears.But something special is going on in two Ohio Democratic strongholds: Cuyahoga and Franklin counties.I track on this handy web page that other places around the country — including other Ohio counties — are so far reporting low single digit early voting rates. In stark contrast, over 112,000 votes have already been cast in these two Ohio counties. As a comparison, this represents over ten percent of all ballots cast in the 2006 election in these counties, with still some time to go.I spoke with local election officials in both counties to understand what is fueling their early voting. They attribute this phenomenon to two factors. First, Ohio recently adopted no-fault absentee voting, which increased the pool of eligible early voters. Second, local election officials in these counties decided to mail an absentee ballot request form to every registered voter. The response has clearly been enthusiastic.Questions remain how this will play out over the course of the entire election. Will early voting numbers continue to increase in the remaining days of the election, as they tend to do elsewhere and in other elections? Will this phenomenon actually increase turnout, or will voters simply substitute casting their ballot on Election Day for one cast by mail?For the campaigns, every early vote cast by an identified supporter is a contact that they can scratch off their lists. They can then re-target their voter mobilization efforts to eligible persons who have not yet voted. That these votes are being banked in high Democratic areas is likely welcome news for statewide Democratic candidates, like Democratic gubernatorial candidate Ted Strickland who is locked in a tight battle with Republican candidate John Kasich.For pollsters conducting surveys in Ohio, these high levels of early voting will force them to modify their likely voter modeling to account for people who have already voted. Finally, early voting in these counties raises a good question how the much-discussed enthusiasm gap towards Republicans will actually play out when it comes to voting. UPDATE: A helpful reader pointed me to Iowa statistics, which tell a similar story as Ohio. Someone forgot to tell Democratic voters about the enthusiasm gap. 42% of the 119,430 early voters in Iowa are registered Democrats compared with 29% registered as Republican.~~~~~>>>hmmAgain, Ohio is the bellwether …

  176. Mr. Universe says:

    There are a couple of good looking cougars running for South Dakota Representative. One is a rancher and both of them hunt. They seem to be a little less crazy than Princess Quitterpants though. Read the story here:href=”http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2010_Elections/elections-2010-south-dakota-sarah-palin/story?id=11860378″

  177. Beverly says:

    “It is an intentional perjorative.” – Mr. Universebut in this case it wasn’tit was used by nate silver at 538.nytsee the context i provided above

  178. filistro says:

    Re: “whore”… I agree with Beverly on this one. Besides the common sexual definition, an acceptable meaning for “whore has always been this: (from the Online Dictionary)3. whore, v. – to compromise oneself for money or other gains; eg. “She whored herself to Hollywood”As long as I can remember, the word has been used in exactly that connotation to apply to politicians and other sell-outs.I was actually a bit surprised (though I really should know better by now ;-( when the Rightwing Outrage Machine latched onto this one and decided to become deeply, passionately, personally offended.

  179. dr_funguy says:

    Im not usually a big fan of Joe Klein, but he has a highly quotable column this week:”There is something profoundly diseased about a society that idolizes its ignoramuses and disdains its experts.”http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2010/10/14/ignorance-as-authenticity/#ixzz12REYRzh1

  180. Alki says:

    @ filistroI was actually a bit surprised (though I really should know better by now ;-( when the Rightwing Outrage Machine latched onto this one and decided to become deeply, passionately, personally offended. ****************************************Plus, the term was used by a staffer on a private phone conversation. Does that mean the candidate must monitor the language of their staffers 24/7; in their homes, in their cars etc? IMO the whole thing is much ado about nothing.

  181. Jeff says:

    Morning Jay: Special Prognostication Edition!October 15, 2010 6:30 AMWe’re a little more than two weeks out from the election, and now is a good time to check in with electoral prognosticators to see what they think is going to happen.1. Hotline On Call polled Beltway insiders on both sides and finds this result: This week, Political Insiders were asked to rate on a scale of zero (no chance) to 10 (virtual certainty) how likely it was that Republicans were going to take over the House and the Senate in November. The 111 Democratic Insiders who responded gave an average score of 6.7 out of 10 that Republicans would win the House. Not surprisingly, the 104 Republican Insiders who participated in the poll this week were even more bullish: their average score was 8.4 out of 10 that they would capture the House. For the Democratic Insiders, that average score of 6.7 was exactly the same as it was right after Labor Day, when the Political Insiders were asked the same question rating the GOP chances of winning the House and Senate. 2. RealClearPolitics currently sees 184 seats going to the Democrats, 211 going to the Republicans, and another 40 as toss-ups. Allocate the remaining seats evenly, and you get a GOP pickup of 52 seats.3. Nate Silver wins the Rube Goldberg Award for the cycle by employing a complicated system of levers and pulleys to predict a very precise 47.5 seats. 4. Over at Pollster, Steve Lombardo predicts the Democrats will lose something between 60 and 70 seats. He writes: During the last 14 days the White House and President Obama have gone on the attack, and their strategy is pretty simple: “Let’s acknowledge the voter anger and make sure it gets funneled toward something else.” Thus we have seen political attacks on just about everyone — and everything — out there. The problem, though, is that voters aren’t angry with Karl Rove, John Boehner, the Chamber of Commerce or even the “undisclosed financing” of elections. Voters are angry about the economy and they have two devastating perceptions of this administration: voters think it is incompetent and that it has overreached over the past two years. An even bigger problem for the White House is that voters may have already tuned the President out; virtually every possible metric used to evaluate the outcome of the midterm elections suggest a massive GOP victory. So let’s just come out and say it: there is no reason to think that Republicans will do any worse than 1994 (when they picked up 54 seats) and there is plenty of data to suggest that it will, in fact, be a better year for the GOP. Our projection — based on all current available data — is that the GOP will gain between 60 and 70 House seats in November.To be continued…..

  182. Jeff says:

    4. Larry Sabato – a professor of politics at the University of Virginia – still sees Republican pickups of 47 seats. He has offered that number since before Labor Day, and plans to “tweak” it closer to the election. He does note that, “If we were to do so today, we would expand the GOP gains by single-digits.”5. Also at Sabato’s site, Emory University’s Alan Abramowitz develops a predictive model based upon the final Gallup generic ballot that predicts, if the current number holds, the GOP will pick up more than 68 seats. 6. Tom Davis, former chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, thinks the GOP “will net 50 plus, and I think it’s more likely to go up than down.” 7. Stuart Rothenberg is on the more conservative end: “Likely Republican gain of 37-45 seats, with considerably larger gains in excess of 45 seats quite possible. “ 8. Cook Political says: “For every isolated race in which a last minute scandal sinks a Republican…there are ten races in which Republicans are steadily closing in on Democratic leads…Overall, given the status of these Toss Up races and the length of the Lean Democratic column, Democrats’ chances of losing at least 50 seats are now greater than their chances of holding losses under 45 seats.”9. As for yours truly, I am still where I was a few weeks ago: the GOP slightly outperforms its 1994 haul. I called it 57 seats then, and I still think that is a reasonable number.http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-special-prognostication-edition_508750.html

  183. Jeff says:

    From Charles Krauthammer, pointing out sheer desperation:Most shameless attack campaign (national). President Obama suggesting that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is secretly using foreign money to fund its campaign ads. There’s not a shred of evidence that this is true. When Bob Schieffer asked David Axelrod for evidence, he responded, “Well, do you have any evidence that it’s not, Bob?” That’s like some lunatic claiming that Obama secretly says Muslim prayers at night that no one can see and no one can hear. You ask: What’s your evidence? He says: What’s yours that he is not? You say: No one’s ever seen or heard him do that. He says: Aha, that’s exactly my point.

  184. shiloh says:

    Jeffrey, you got most of your talkin’ points in ~ Congrats! :)btw, hope you’re not too disappointed regardless. lolieI’ll dance if the GOP gains 35 House seatshmm, will Jeffrey be dancin’ or won’t he … as the tension builds 😉

  185. shiloh says:

    btw Jeffrey, strange you’re not talkin’ about Lieberman anymore as you received a total smackdown, eh.lol just like Bartles you get crushed in a debate and either change the subject or leave altogether. :)take care, blessings

  186. Mainer says:

    While what ever the gains the Republicans make are still total BS in terms of deserving them I am curious as to what the right, the far right and the ohhhhhhhh so far right will do if it does not happen. What do you have left for scape goats? I mean you have driven Achorn out of business by violating the constitution and singleing out an entity based on allagations….Diebold????? No wait they work for the Republicans already…..not enough money????? nah that can’t be you sold your souls this time around….hmmmmmm. Oh wait I know it will have been the Black Panthers fault…..Here is a scarry message. It does not look as though some of the teper right effort is doing so well in Maine and already I am hearing “we didn’t go right enough”. I kid you not. Yes that has got to be it you were not right enough……yahhhhhhh more cow bell. My word.

  187. Jeff says:

    Mainer wrote:While what ever the gains the Republicans make are still total BS in terms of deserving them I am curious as to what the right, the far right and the ohhhhhhhh so far right will do if it does not happen. What do you have left for scape goats? I mean you have driven Achorn out of business by violating the constitution and singleing out an entity based on allagations….Diebold????? No wait they work for the Republicans already…..not enough money????? nah that can’t be you sold your souls this time around….hmmmmmm.============Hmmm, so many targets of opportunity. Acorn driven out of business by violating the constitution? What “constitutional violation” did the DEMOCRATIC congress commit when they cut off funding? Just curious…..Diebold machines? Purchased by Democratic and Republican officials alike. Any evidence that the executives at Diebold secretly transmit coded instructions, or is this just another conspiratorial left-wing fantasy? You guys go ballistic at the birthers, but this one makes them look sane (which is really quite an accomplishment!)I do enjoy watching the left…. When they win, it’s proof that the people are good and wise. When they lose, the people are stupid and bigoted, and Fox is sending out brain waves to fog minds (tell you what, in about 2.5 weeks, the Delaware Ditz is going to be having a sale on tin-foil helmets — you might want to pick up a few spares…. The last two years have been a fiasco run by a bunch of wingers who have never managed anything larger than a Senate office, and have no idea why their policies are wildly unpopular and killing the economy.Yup, the Republicans may lose in Maine (major important and influential state that it is), but I’ll swap Maine for Ohio, PA, and IL.

  188. Jeff says:

    shiloh wrote:btw Jeffrey, strange you’re not talkin’ about Lieberman anymore as you received a total smackdown, eh.lol just like Bartles you get crushed in a debate and either change the subject or leave altogether.===========Actually, unlike you, I stop asking a question after there’s an answer, instead of going to deflection and “amusing” little jibes. You might consider trying it some time. (lol,take care, blessings, and all those other clever phrases you throw out in lieu of making thoughtful comments).To save the more rational people on the site the effort of going through all the posts: My question was “Why is it crazy when conservatives work against RINO’s in primaries, but not when leftists work against DINO’s.” Near as I understood the answer, by backing the President on foreign policy, Lieberman made himself anathema (so much for politics stopping at the water’s edge). But the unforgivable crime that made opposing him in 2006 the right thing to do, was the fact that he supported McCain in 2008.I never did get an answer to my question about opposing Bennet and Lincoln. But that’s OK. I get the point that something bad the other side does, can be perfectly logical and right when you do it. It’s probably correct that the Democrats have fewer primary challengers based on ideology. After all, they all think alike 🙂 and they all get their marching orders from the NY Times 🙂 .

  189. Jeff says:

    Alki said:Thirdly, they are not immune to the negativity surrounding Obama these days. Its become popular to take a pot shot at the president from both sides of the aisle. That too will change. ==============Why do you think it will change? Do you expect a sudden outbreak of either bipartisanship or (far less likely) competence?

  190. Alki says:

    Latest tweet from Nate:A very smart person in a position to know tells me I’m wrong on #PASEN and private polls genuinely show the race tightening. FWIW.

  191. Alki says:

    @ Jeff……..Why do you think it will change? Do you expect a sudden outbreak of either bipartisanship or (far less likely) competence?****************************************Cute, Jeff. Obama has always been competent and well measured when implementing his policies. There will never be a question of that. However, as with most popular, charismatic presidents, after building him up, the media has had fun tearing him down esp. with the economy not turning as fast as once predicted.However, when the economy turns, and it is turning and its momentum is picking up, there will be a resurgence in Obama’s popularity just in time for 2012. There is no doubt. ;-)You wingers just don’t get it. You don’t slap on some bandaids and crazy glue and a fresh coat of witchcraft and paint on your damaged brand and expect it to be the next coming. It doesn’t work that way. The GOP brand needs some serious work and overhaul. Unfortunately for you, your leaders are too facile to do the hard labor that’s needed.

  192. Realist says:

    @Jeff,Diebold machines? Purchased by Democratic and Republican officials alike. Any evidence that the executives at Diebold secretly transmit coded instructions, or is this just another conspiratorial left-wing fantasy? You guys go ballistic at the birthers, but this one makes them look sane (which is really quite an accomplishment!)Without giving away too much about my identity, suffice it to say that you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about here. There is a difference between insecure software through incompetence (which nearly every company has, incidentally), and insecure software by design, which Diebold produced. I’ve seen the source code. I know it’s true.

  193. Alki says:

    From DK:Manchin has opened a wide lead over the Floridian.

  194. Mainer says:

    Jeff I didn’t say Republicans alone on Achorn. Dems and Reps both blew this one. As per Wicki:On November 12th 2009, the group ACORN sued the United States Government over a section of a continuing appropriations resolution that the group claimed was a bill of attainder. The section read as follows:None of the funds made available by this joint resolution or any prior Act may be provided to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries, or allied organizations.[14]The case was filed in the United States District Court in Brooklyn.[3] Another bill with broader language, H.R. 3221 (Title IV), known as the Defund ACORN Act, also sought to strip federal funding from the group, but it had not become law by the time ACORN filed its suit.[15]On March 10, 2010, the court ruled in favor of ACORN, and declared the Congressional ban on ACORN funding was an illegal Bill of Attainder, in violation of the U.S. Constitution. Case: ACORN v. USA [16]On August 13, 2010 the 2nd Circuit unanimously reversed CCR’s USDC Bill Of Attainder victory in ACORN. The court found ACORN had standing but no bill of attainder claims. They sent the case back to the District Court to look at First Amendment and Due Process violations.I know many people have bought Diebold voting machines and others as well but it doesn’t jump out at me where the Dems have been looked at for screwing with an election by using rigged voting machines……besides any damned fool knows dead people in Chicago could never operate one of those complicated little suckers.And no snide comments about Maine there lad…..we have spent years electing Republicans we know would piss the rest of you off. Do you know how much time and effort that takes? Why we have to search all over the place to find just the right RINO knowing full well that years down the road teapers will come to pass and they shall be insensed at our litte zoo.

  195. Jeff says:

    Alki said: Cute, Jeff. Obama has always been competent and well measured when implementing his policies. There will never be a question of that. However, as with most popular, charismatic presidents, after building him up, the media has had fun tearing him down esp. with the economy not turning as fast as once predicted.However, when the economy turns, and it is turning and its momentum is picking up, there will be a resurgence in Obama’s popularity just in time for 2012. There is no doubt.================Thanks. I thought it was a good line….You say there is “no doubt” that things will be better in two years. I try to avoid putting extra miles on my crystal ball, so the furthest I’ll go is “who knows.”However, there are different types of recessions/depressions. The classic variety is the inventory cycle, which typically last less than a year, and is triggered by a rise in interest rates. Much rarer are the financial/debt crisis types, which typically last 5 to 10 years. That’s the type we’re in, and if this one holds true to form, that puts recovery well past 2012. The problem comes from debt. A typical recession is triggered by debt becoming more expensive (higher interest rates). People reduce purchases, businesses don’t re-order, factories do layoffs, and bang! It’s a recession. After inventories are worked down, businesses re-order, people get rehired, and the cycle begins anew.This time, it wasn’t the business cycle. We had relatively low interest rates for 10 years. The collapse was triggered by a decline in asset values. First sub-prime, then regular mortgages started declining in value, because the underlying assets became less valuable than the debt. The process feeds on itself until equilibrium is reached, at which point the asset base (you borrow against both assets and income) is worth much less. As a nation, we have many assets, most of which are worth much less than they were 3-4 years ago. We also have a decline in income. That means we’re over-leveraged. How much are we over-leveraged? Impossible to say. There’s a lot of mortgages which are non-performing. Individual (consumer) debt is coming down very slowly, and is still much higher than it historically used to be. State and local governments are grossly over-leveraged — both in terms of bonds, which are recognized liabilities, and pension liabilities, which are largely not recognized. The Feds are in slightly better shape only because they can print money. However, we’re currently on a trajectory for debt to hit 200% of GDP in a few short years, which everybody agrees is a point of collapse. In addition, the Feds have not taken into account the shortfalls in social security, federal emplooyee retirement obligations, and future medicare/aid costs. As we argued before, when you’re stone broke “investment” may be attractive, but not feasible.We have no locomotive to pull us out of the ditch. Obama won’t have his recovery.

  196. Jeff says:

    Mainer said “And no snide comments about Maine there lad…..we have spent years electing Republicans we know would piss the rest of you off.”============== How could you POSSIBLY see the following as a snide comment: I said “Yup, the Republicans may lose in Maine (major important and influential state that it is), but I’ll swap Maine for Ohio, PA, and IL.”Really! I said it would take three major industrial states with 62 electoral votes to make up for the devastating psychological loss of Maine.Fine state. I greatly admire L.L. Bean, its major industry. I would never, ever consider making a snide comment about the great state of Maine — I would hate to lose access to Maine lobster.

  197. shiloh says:

    @Realistre: JeffreyWithout giving away too much about my identity, suffice it to say that you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about here.~~~~~@MainerJeff I didn’t say Republicans alone on Achorn. Dems and Reps both blew this one. As per Wicki:~~~~~Let the record show Jeffrey is both misinformed and again has a reading comprehension problem, as per usual.>And too funny as he answers my post(s) w/both an absurd deflection and a personal attack deflection, again as per usual.Different day, same shit …

  198. shiloh says:

    @JeffreyI would never, ever consider making a snide comment about the great state of Maine — I would hate to lose access to Maine lobster.~~~~~lol as Jeffrey does more song and dance tap dancin’ than Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire!Indeed, perish the thought Jeffrey would ever make a snide comment at 538 as not only does he have reading comprehension problems w/other peep’s posts, but his own as well, eh.

  199. Mainer says:

    Yes but Jeff did pay appropriate hommage to both LL Bean and our lubstah.Jeff we do know where we stand in the grand scheme of things. Probably why there has been an active group here for years that believe we are the missing Canadian Atlantic province. And they would like to correct the problem. Hell a third of the state have relations in Quebec, and almost that many with family in PEI or Nova Scotia. I live closer to Montreal than I do New Hampshire (actually quite a bit closer). Now jeff if we can get you adicted to Moxie, fiddleheads, blueberries and Maine spuds we will be just so there. Should I send you tapes of Maine humor…..given enough time you might get some of the punch lines.

  200. Jeff says:

    Mainer said:Should I send you tapes of Maine humor…..given enough time you might get some of the punch lines.==============Free stuff is always welcome — you should see what you get if you answer the e-mails that go into your spam folder.As for Maine humor — as a kid I went to a school that had the Rev. Bob Bryan as the chaplain. Bob was a renowned humorist who did the “Bert & I” series of LP’s (geeze, I’m dating myself here).We always looked forward to his sermons, because he’d frequently do them in a Maine accent, or illustrate points with a story that he had heard from Bert. His “normal” voice was unaccented, but when he dropped into Maine-speak, he was a whole different person.As for leaving the country…. could we make a trade with Canada — they get Maine and we get Alberta? And we’ll even throw in Boston and Seattle…. (I’d also offer them Berkeley and San Francisco, but that probably would queer the deal.)

  201. Alki says:

    Q Jeff…….We have no locomotive to pull us out of the ditch. Obama won’t have his recovery.**************************************No locomotive? That’s where you’re wrong. We have the rest of the world to help us recover. Brazil, China, India, and Aussieland are all booming. Canada, Germany, Argentina, other parts of Europe, Korea and Chile are all doing well. Thanks to GW Bush, the US is the significant laggard this time.Now can we talk elections. Thank you very much.

  202. Mr. Universe says:

    200!(sorry, couldn’t resist)

  203. Mr. Universe says:

    @BeverlyRE: Democrat vs democratic. No,no. I agree. Nate used the term correctly. I was speaking about the misuse of the term in general.

  204. Jeff says:

    Alki said: No locomotive? That’s where you’re wrong. We have the rest of the world to help us recover. Brazil, China, India, and Aussieland are all booming. Canada, Germany, Argentina, other parts of Europe, Korea and Chile are all doing well. Thanks to GW Bush, the US is the significant laggard this time.Now can we talk elections. Thank you very much.===========I thought we were talking elections — Obama’s chances in two years following the (Bart’s gone, so I have to fill in) TSUNAMI TO END ALL TSUNAMI’S).If you’re counting on Argentina, good luck. They make Greece look like Switzerland. Most of the rest of the countries you cite are net exporters, not importers. We have negotiated a free trade pact with Korea, but our economic wunderkind in the White House won’t send it to Congress. And with all due respect to filistro, we’re never going to get out of the ditch by increasing our exports to Canada!

  205. filistro says:

    From TPM… this graphic looks even better over at TPM, with all that BLUE on the upside!!TODAY’S TOP POLLS * West Virginia-Senate (Special) 2010 | Orion Strategies Manchin D 48% Raese R 38% * Washington-Senate | SurveyUSA Murray D 50% Rossi R 47% * California-Governor | Rasmussen Brown D 50% Whitman R 44% * Colorado-Governor | Rasmussen Hickenlooper D 42% Maes R 12% Tancredo AC 38% * Washington-Senate | Univ. of WA Murray D 50% Rossi R 42%

  206. Alki says:

    We need more Dems like this guy.‘You’re mad at me?’http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43666_Page3.html

  207. Alki says:

    @ filstro……..All looks good except for Hickenlooper…..he’s loosing ground to that horse’s butt Tancredo. Tancredo is surging and stealing votes from both H and Maes. Not good. CO get it together.

  208. Alki says:

    @ Jeff………”I thought we were talking elections — Obama’s chances in two years following the (Bart’s gone, so I have to fill in) TSUNAMI TO END ALL TSUNAMI’S).”***************************************Don’t count your tsunamis before they crest.****************************************”If you’re counting on Argentina, good luck. They make Greece look like Switzerland. Most of the rest of the countries you cite are net exporters, not importers.”****************************************Argentina is no Greece…….not even close. It has some serious resources and seems finally to be getting its act together. It can’t afford to screw up any more……..its major rivals on the continent, Brazil and Chile, are quickly becoming first world.And they may be net exporters of resources and/or finished products but they all have fast growing middle classes whose product consumption is increasing exponentially.****************************************”We have negotiated a free trade pact with Korea, but our economic wunderkind in the White House won’t send it to Congress. And with all due respect to filistro, we’re never going to get out of the ditch by increasing our exports to Canada!”***************************************The US is not a big exporter any more. Its big job generator is the service industries. Those industries are the ones who have not been hiring because Americans are buying finished products and scrimping on services. That will change when Americans become more confident about the reocvery.

  209. Alki says:

    @ filstro…..Just found out that CO governor poll was done by the house of Ras. They are probably off in favor of the Rs on the ballot. I feel better. 😉

  210. Jeff says:

    @Alki.I say we don’t have a locomotive to pull us out of the economic ditch, and you say the locomotive is going to be foreign demand from booming economies. I question the countries you claim are “booming.” Your answer is:”The US is not a big exporter any more. Its big job generator is the service industries.”=========So, exactly how are these booming foreign economies going to help create demand in the US if they’re not going to increase their imports of US goods and services?I fail completely to see your “logic.”

  211. Alki says:

    “So, exactly how are these booming foreign economies going to help create demand in the US if they’re not going to increase their imports of US goods and services?I fail completely to see your “logic.””***************************************They ARE buying our exports and services. Its Americans who are foregoing the buying of American services. As they gain more confidence in America’s economic future, Americans will return to the marketplace of services.See what happens when you elect an idiot into the presidency for 8 long years? There are consequences. We are paying those consequences now.

  212. Jeff says:

    Alki said: Cute, Jeff.Obama has always been competent and well measured when implementing his policies. There will never be a question of that. However, as with most popular, charismatic presidents, after building him up, the media has had fun tearing him down esp. with the economy not turning as fast as once predicted.However, when the economy turns, and it is turning and its momentum is picking up, there will be a resurgence in Obama’s popularity just in time for 2012. There is no doubt.I question whether the economy is picking up. There is still a balance sheet problem — debt is too high.According to the busines press, Business people are frightened and afraid to hire. I don’t forsee much of a boom coming. That won’t do much to help Obama’s re-election in 2010.I can see a moderate Republican like Mitch Daniels doing quite well in the primaries — conservative like him — he’s fiscally responsible. Put Marco Rubio on the ticket and watch those hispanic vot s roll in. Question — will Obama dump Biden? And put Hillary on the ticket?

  213. shiloh says:

    @JeffreyQuestion — will Obama dump Biden? And put Hillary on the ticket?~~~~~~~~~~Interesting deflection in a 2010 election thread. Are you worried about an Obama/Hillary ticket in 2012.>Indeed, always answer an inane, O/T question w/another question to said worried conservative, who is already obsessing about 2012, before the results of 2010 are counted.Bartles, congrats as you now have an obsessive winger troll brother in arms. :)Together, you should be unstoppable …

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s