Matt Yglesias

55 Responses to “Obama and the Realists”

1. minderbender Says:
   October 31st, 2008 at 6:22 pm

   Remember to vote next year, everyone!

2. knoh Says:
   October 31st, 2008 at 7:04 pm

   Matt, I was at your talk at UCLA yesterday. You made the point that the absence of a foreign policy discussion during the campaign took away the opportunity for Obama (should he win) to gain any sort of foreign policy mandate. In your opinion, is an endorsement such as this or Ken Adelman’s likely to provide some level of mandate albeit less powerful than affirmation by the electorate? I understand that voters as a collective matter in a way that policy-makers don’t. However, it doesn’t seem too far out that endorsements from a few heavy hitters along with the failure of the Iraq war would give Obama some “free space” to reset the Democratic approach to foreign policy and national security.

3. ndm Says:
   October 31st, 2008 at 7:05 pm

   I lost interest in their thoughts when I got to this sentence:

   If the activist left wing of the Democratic Party has its way, America could face the remote but real prospect of liberal fascism, a unique blend of liberal social engineering with economic redistribution. (my emphasis)

4. Virginia voter Says:
   October 31st, 2008 at 7:30 pm

   While I can understand some backlash to the neocons, I admit I am still surprised that any conservatives would back Obama.

   When Obama’s national security advisor Danzig says that Winnie the Pooh should be the fundamental textbook on national security, that raises serious concerns.

   If, God forbid, the U.S. is hit with another terrorist attack, I don’t want Obama and Danzig sitting around pondering, “What would Winnie do? What would Winnie the Pooh do?”

5. duBois Says:
   October 31st, 2008 at 7:33 pm

   If we’re hit by another terrorist attack, we should get our head out of the honey jar.

   Next question.

6. rea Says:
   October 31st, 2008 at 7:39 pm

   While I can understand some backlash to the neocons, I admit I am still surprised that any conservatives would back Obama.

   I am still surprised any thinking person of any political stripe does not. Competance ought to trump ideology, in our present situation.

   Similarly what Obama would do in response to a terrorist attack is clear from his statements, if you would bother to listen. What we should have done last time–catch those responsible and bring them to justice.

7. ssa Says:
   October 31st, 2008 at 7:40 pm

   This acceptance of Obama by Republicans shows why he is a poor choice to lead the Democrats (and why the Dems are homogenizing with the Right). He and McCain are virtually identical in their attitudes towards the big issues of our time.

   http://www.sunstateactivist.org/ssablog/

8. Kolohe Says:
   October 31st, 2008 at 7:42 pm

   Clearly, this isn’t going to be the difference-maker in next year’s election

   I agree. Foreign policy is rarely a factor in the Virginia gubernatorial contests.

9. Virginia voter Says:
   October 31st, 2008 at 7:52 pm

   Rea, I have listened. Obama makes lots of pie-in-the-sky statements. He seems like a typical politician trying to say anything to get elected. With a scant list of accomplishments, I have a very difficult time believing him.

10. rea Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 8:02 pm

    Rea, I have listened.

    Appears not.

    What has he said should have been done about 9/11? Catch bin Laden and not invade Iraq. There’s your answer.

11. Virginia voter Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 8:11 pm

    Rea, I don’t think I’ve heard Obama claim that he would have sent in enough troops to seal off Tora Bora and prevent Osama from escaping. That happened before the Iraq war fyi.

    Maybe Obama will add that claim to his stump speech tomorrow? It really wouldn’t surprise me.

12. MAX HATS Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 8:26 pm

    Why, it’s an impartial Virginia Voter!

    With some serious doubts about Barack Obama.

    This doesn’t seem contrived at all.

13. Joel Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 8:30 pm

    “Obama makes lots of pie-in-the-sky statements. He seems like a typical politician trying to say anything to get elected. With a scant list of accomplishments, I have a very difficult time believing him.”

    And how is McCain *not* a typical politician trying to say anything to get elected? Did you actually fall for the phony “mavrick” propaganda? What are his accomplishments (other than crashing five jets)? Doing propaganda for N. Vietnam (don’t tell me he was “tortured” since he voted against defining his treatment as torture)? How can you believe anything McCain says, when he’s flip-flopped so many times on so many issues?

    Smarter trolls, please.

14. Virginia voter Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 8:39 pm

    Max Hats, I do live in Virginia and plan to vote.

    Joel, I agree McCain has changed his positions out of pragmatism to win his party’s nomination. But he has exhibited a career of reaching across the aisle and was known as a maverick even before this campaign. In terms of accomplishments, I think advocating the surge in Iraq is a major one. Doing that was very unpopular at the time and the strategy has really turned that war around.

15. MAX HATS Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 8:45 pm

    And the fact that you are spouting republican talking points on a liberal blog you’ve never (as best I can recall) posted to before just a few days before the election?

    Totally legit. Real Americans (from Real Virginia) do that all the time. I don’t doubt for a second that you are from Virginia, or that you are a voter. I’m just saying the whole act is a bit contrived.

16. Reality Man Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 8:55 pm

    known as a maverick even before this campaign

    Who gives a fuck? Being a maverick doesn’t mean anything. Being a media whore doesn’t mean anything. But being completely insane and naive like McCain on foreign policy matters.

17. Virginia voter Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 9:19 pm

    Reality Man, I think being a man of principle vs a man of his party does mean something. I don’t think McCain is insane on foreign policy matters. While I don’t think that invading Iraq was the correct decision, I think that when McCain advocated the surge strategy once we were there has paid off. Also, I think by him voting against keeping troops in Beirut, it shows he’s not a warmonger.

    McCain definitely has a lot more experience than Obama. He served this country. Obama wasn’t even in the Senate to authorize (or not) the war in Iraq.

    Max Hats, you’re right that this is the first night you’ve seen me post under this handle. I’ve spent the past couple of weeks mentally preparing myself for an Obama win… but in the past couple of days, I’ve started to believe that McCain actually has a chance.

18. Ed Smithe Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 9:20 pm

    Matt,

    In realist circles, Ellsworth might have a bit of cache, but Dmitri no longer. The Nixon Center has been an absolute disaster over the past eight years and has done little to advance the realist cause as a whole.

    The National Interest just hired a new editor and is clearly heading in a more neoconservative direction (at least in the print version). What does that say about its publisher?

    The next generation is all that realists have…but unfortunately they have been ignored by the “lions,” all for almighty dollar (see Kissinger and Baker).

    There is a real opportunity for the Obama camp to take these folks in and do what the neocons have done for their own…make them players in the bureaucracy.

    I very much hope that folks on the left understand the opportunity they have here. These are some of the brightest Republicans and Democrats in town when it comes to the business of Foreign Affairs.

19. El Cid Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 10:00 pm

    As a Georgia voter, I have considered voting for John McCain, but I just do not feel I can trust him with this sort of responsibility. His record in the Keating 5 scandal and in giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to radical professor Rashid Khalidi give me cause to question his seriousness as a candidate.

20. anon Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 10:26 pm

    I’m sorry, I can’t take anyone seriously who doesn’t believe mccain is insane on foreign policy.

    The man would have us in a war with any country that’s *not* a true democracy.

    I’d be more inclined to trust him if he showed any kind of rational thought on the campaign trail – but he doesn’t. Everyday it’s something new and 50% of the time he looks panicked, 50% of the time he looks irritated that he’s not president yet.

    why is he so gosh darn angry all the time?

    good lord, the idea of mccain + palin meeting with foreign diplomats scares the crap out of me… no wait, they wouldn’t MEET with foreigners because hey, we crush our enemies and make them fear us because we’re the most awesome place in the world! *rolls eyes*

    and liberal fascism is the stupidest thing i’ve heard today. isn’t that an oxymoron? and why is 1/2 the country not acknowledging the fact that bush/cheney have stomped on this country for 8 years? blah, no one said anything then, so i guess no one is going to say anything now. they’ll just “voice” their disapproval in random gallup polls.

21. Virginia voter Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 10:33 pm

    El Cid, my understanding was that (re: Keating 5), despite accepting contributions, John McCain did no favors for the S&Ls in Congress and that the money given to Khalidi’s organization was only for polling.

    In terms of contributions, I understand that Obama is refusing to release the information of his under $2300 donors. So someone can just donate $2299 one day, buy another pre-paid credit card, donate another $2299, day after day and they don’t even have to be an American citizen. Obama’s campaign has disabled the basic checks that can prevent illegal donations. Obama lied when he said he would use public financing and is now attempting to buy the election with annoying infomercials and robocalls. Michelle Obama just called me (pre-recorded) and told me to vote early even though there is no early voting in my state.

    I am more concerned about the LA Times refusing to release the video of Obama’s toast to Khalidi. Why is that video under wraps?

22. gordonminor Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 10:38 pm

    I gave up when I got to this:

    There is something unbecoming about the first major presidential candidate representing a minority group telling audiences that they should not be concerned about increasing taxes on some of their fellow Americans because the group is only 5 percent of the population. Class discrimination may be less offensive than racial discrimination, but it is not fundamentally different.

    I didn’t get to the imminent danger of liberal fascism part.

23. Ed Marshall Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 10:42 pm

    Well, VA voter, you are part of a risible, little minority party that we are eager to abuse and shit upon for at least two years. Sucks to be you, and we don’t really give a damn what you think.

24. Richard Steven Hack Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 10:53 pm

    Yglesias has his head up his ass about Obama and foreign policy.

    Here is Obama directly via emails explaining how he’s going to screw up Iran:

    Rivals Split on U.S. Power, but Ideas Defy Labels
    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/23/us/politics/23policy.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1225507857-HMR6VGGiLrhzEwU3U1sHUQ

    For example, it is Mr. McCain — the man who amended the words of a Beach Boys song last year to joke about bombing Iran’s nuclear sites — who says he could imagine a situation in which Iran’s behavior changes so much that he would be willing “to consider” allowing Iran to enrich its own uranium, producing a fuel that could be used for nuclear power — but only under highly restrictive conditions that ensure it could never be used for weapons.

    Mr. Obama, the candidate who has expressed far more willingness to sit down and negotiate with the Iranians, said in an e-mail message passed on by an aide that in any final deal he would not allow Iran to produce uranium on Iranian soil, the same hard-line view enunciated by the Bush administration.

    Consider the delicate issue of Pakistan, where it is Mr. Obama who has been far more willing than Mr. McCain to threaten sending in American troops on ground raids. Mr. McCain, by contrast, argues that Pakistan must control its territory. “I don’t think the American people today are ready to commit troops to Waziristan,” he said, months before Mr. Bush signed secret orders this summer authorizing ground raids in Pakistan, including the violent sanctuaries of North and South Waziristan.

    Mr. McCain, now the Republican nominee, agreed to an interview during the primary campaign. Obama aides answered questions at length, but Mr. Obama, the Democratic nominee, citing the pressures of time in the campaign, declined requests dating to June to be interviewed in detail on how he would handle potential confrontations beyond Iraq that could face the next president.

    It is worth remembering that presidential campaigns are usually terrible predictors of presidential decision-making. John F. Kennedy said virtually nothing about building up troops in Vietnam in 1960, nor did Richard M. Nixon talk in 1968 about engineering an opening to China. George W. Bush, in an interview at his ranch 10 days before his first inaugural in 2001, lamented that sanctions against Saddam Hussein looked like “Swiss cheese” but did not appear, at that time, to be heading toward a military confrontation with him.

    New Look at Engagement

    With the endgame slowly playing out in Iraq, the potential confrontation over neighboring Iran and its nuclear program has emerged as the No. 1 case study in how Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain would use diplomacy and the threat of military force against a hostile state. Based on their careers and their statements, Mr. McCain’s threshold for pre-emptive military action seems lower than Mr. Obama’s.

    For each candidate, the debate over Iran has been somewhat treacherous. Mr. Obama knew his interest in pursuing diplomacy could leave him vulnerable to criticism as a potential appeaser; Mr. McCain, known for his “Bomb Iran” ditty, had to demonstrate that he would not be trigger-happy.

    In the end, both men have proved more comfortable in declaring that they would never allow Iran to become a nuclear weapons state than in explaining how they would obtain the leverage to stop Iran’s nuclear program peacefully. And neither has dealt publicly with the harder question of what to do if Iran assembles all the fuel and components needed for a weapon but stops just short of actually making one.

    Mr. Obama’s declaration that he would engage Iranian leaders without preconditions has dominated the debate and opened him to Mr. McCain’s accusation that he is a naïf, willing to give legitimacy to the Iranian regime. Mr. Obama has backtracked a bit, arguing that he never suggested that the first meetings would be at the presidential level, and that preconditions are less important than “careful preparations.”

    When pressed, Mr. Obama has said that “we will never take military options off the table” and that he would not give the United Nations “veto power” over deciding to strike nuclear facilities.

    The harder question is how to force Iran to give up its uranium enrichment quickly, before it produces enough material to build a weapon — a threshold American and European intelligence officials say may be crossed fairly early in the next presidential term. Mr. McCain has been more vociferous in emphasizing that “we have to do whatever’s necessary” to stop Iran from obtaining a weapon. In 1994, when North Korea was at a similar stage in its nuclear weapons program, Mr. McCain said on “Meet the Press” on NBC that if diplomacy failed to shut down the country’s production facilities within months, “then yes, military air strikes would be called for.”

    Questions to both campaigns in the past few weeks have yielded another example of role reversal. While Mr. McCain seems willing to consider that Iran might someday be trusted to produce its own nuclear fuel, Mr. Obama does not. The director of foreign policy for the McCain campaign, Randy Scheunemann, said that if Iran was in compliance with United Nations resolutions, “it would be appropriate to consider” letting it produce uranium under inspection, which Iran has said is its right.

    Mr. Obama’s position is closer to the zero-tolerance approach adopted by the Bush administration. “I do not believe Iran should be enriching uranium or keeping centrifuges,” he said in an e-mail message passed on by aides.

    Mr. Obama does seem more willing to dangle in front of the Iranians a “grand bargain” that would spell out benefits — diplomatic recognition, an end to sanctions — as a reward for halting its enrichment of uranium and allowing full inspections of the country. Richard J. Danzig, considered a candidate to be secretary of defense in an Obama administration, said Mr. Obama was willing to “put out a more positive side to the agenda to lead the Iranians toward making the right choices here.”

    But Mr. Obama has also been more specific in describing the kind of sanctions he might reach for if the Iranians continue on the current path. “If we can prevent them from importing the gasoline that they need, and the refined petroleum products, that starts changing their cost-benefit analysis,” he said.

    Some experts have counseled caution about such an approach, one that the Bush administration has stopped short of taking. A blockade, however, could constitute an act of war, and most experts believe Iran could respond in kind by cutting off oil exports, increasing prices and leading to shortages.

    In other words:

    1) Obama will not allow Iran to have uranium enrichment on their soil.

    2) Obama will use blockades – an act of war – to coerce Iran into agreeing to this – which it cannot and will not.

    3) If Iran does not agree, Obama will resort to military force.

    4) Obama will not seek UN sanction for this unilateral use of military force by the US against Iran.

    How is this IN ANY WAY different from George W. Bush and Iraq?

25. Ed Marshall Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 11:07 pm

    It’s a bunch of boilerplate, FP, elite bullshit. If he deviated from the script as a candidate, it’s a gaffe. If he ignores it as a president it’s SOP.

    A president Obama can do whatever he wants. Relax. Bush sold a bunch of wolf tickets on Iran to, it doesn’t mean anything.

    Hack, I download a shitload of podcasts to keep me alive at work and every time I hear this one I think of you: http://www.sliceofscifi.com/

    Huge Sarah Conner Chronicles fans. There is always at least ten minutes in there of that.

26. Virginia voter Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 11:26 pm

    Ed, we will see. Drudge is showing that Zogby has McCain up in the most recent day to be posted at 1:00a EDT.

    I think you do give a damn or else you wouldn’t respond to my posts. And even you should admit that this would be a boring blog if everyone agreed all of the time.

    In case you didn’t see my comment on the post below “Spreading the wealth and wooing the base”… here’s a recap:

    I got laid off in December ‘07 and got a 4 month severance package. As it happened, 16/12th of my salary + my wife’s salary was greater than $150k for ‘07.

    Bush and the Democratic Congress decided to give economic stimulus checks this past summer to families that made less than $150k last year. Since with the severance we didn’t qualify, our ‘07 income taxes were spread around to other people as an economic stimulus. In case you haven’t been following the economy, those economic stimulus checks didn’t do squat for the economy. It appears to me that our tax money was spread around for no reason.

    And now Obama wants to do some more spreading the wealth. Booo!

27. David Broadhurst Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 11:30 pm

    The absence of a foreign policy discussion during the campaign took away the opportunity for Obama (should he win) to
    gain any sort of foreign policy mandate

    Indeed.

    McCain’s bellicosity was apparent.

    Obama was more pragmatic about Iraq and Iran, but alarmingly naive about Afghanistan.

    However, there is (pace Bush) more to foreign policy than losing the “War on an Abstract Noun”.

    Obama’s dealings with the other G8 countries, and with China, should commence relatively untrammelled by his election campaign. Fortunately he was not called upon to yield hostages to domestic xenophobia.

28. Ed Marshall Says:
    October 31st, 2008 at 11:40 pm

    I got laid off in December ‘07 and got a 4 month severance package. As it happened, 16/12th of my salary + my wife’s salary was greater than $150k for ‘07.

    Good. F you. Watch your state go blue, and howl at the moon.

29. Virginia voter Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 12:14 am

    Ed Marshall wrote: “Good. F you. Watch your state go blue, and howl at the moon.”

    I certainly hope not and we will see on election day. Good night, all.

    Virginia voter

    P.S. Obama is a fraud; don’t be swayed by his slick marketing/lawyer background! Look at his record! Has he ever accomplished a single thing of significance? Think before you vote; vote experience over hype!

30. anon Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 12:23 am

    Ok so drudge said that Zogby put polling at 48-47 in favor of McCain (based on 1 day polling)

    but zogby hasn’t released his poll yet

    either way, wtf gives, how is that humanely possible given that every single other poll, including the RCP poll (the average) has obama in the lead? even on the state level it’s not that close.

    these polls are confusing… someone’s full of bunk and considering zogby blew in ‘04 i’m guessing its that poll.

31. Effective Mailer Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 12:31 am

    I got a mailer today saying that Obama voted to allow lawsuits holding the manufacturers of guns responsible for acts of criminals. That doesn’t make sense to me. Should the manufacturer of pencils be sued if a student stabs a fellow student with one?

    The vote referenced was U.S. Senate S. 397, vote 219.

32. Ed Marshall Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 12:37 am

    I certainly hope not and we will see on election day. Good night, all.

    You can hope all you want, it’s done.

    Your brand of bullshit is dead, I’d put my energy into figuring out why and how to fix it.

33. Evil Twin Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 12:43 am

    Wow, I got a mailer today saying that John McCain has song songs suggesting we terrorize innocent populations by using our planes to plant bombs on their soil.

    Wait, wait, that wasn’t a mailer. That was something John McCain actually did. Do we want someone that fucking crazy running our nation? Isn’t the slaughter of innocent people something that should worry people more than tax rates on the ultra-wealthy in this nation?

    The idiocy of the moron above comparing pencils to lethal weaponry is beyond mockery. To any but the dumbest of readers it is self-mocking. Sort of like the “Virginian” who thinks McCain didn’t do anything for Keating. Right. I guess that’s what happens when you get your “news” from the same place you get your paycheck – the McCain campaign.

34. Effective Mailer Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 12:57 am

    Evil Twin, maybe you’re the same person who claimed Bush did cocaine so he shouldn’t be president. Factcheck: Obama used cocaine.

    As far as the “Bomb Iran” song, I believe McCain was just joking with a fellow vet. After all, he did serve in our armed forces unlike Barack Obama. Obama said he thought about joining the military but chose not to since we weren’t in a war. Give me a break!

    As far as Barack goes, there is no there there.

35. Ed Marshall Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 1:01 am

    As far as Barack goes, there is no there there.

    And you are going to lose in a landslide. Doesn’t that suck. Suck. on. this.

36. Jon Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 1:10 am

    Again, Matt, with the careless f—ing mistakes!!! First, December = October. Now, “next year’s election” I assume that equals “THIS years election” or perhaps “next WEEK’s election.” Really, these mistakes make this blog hard to read. I first thought maybe I was reading a post from last year that your blog accidentally reposted. . . .

37. Virginia voter Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 1:17 am

    Ed Marshall said, “Suck. on. this.”

    Are you having an Obama fantasy? This is a good illustration of the blind infatuation that I’m so often seeing with Obama supporters.

    Rudy G. did a good job describing Obama’s resume at the RNC: “He’s never had to lead people in crisis. This is not a personal attack; it’s a statement of fact. Barack Obama has never led anything. Nothing. Nada.”

38. MAX HATS Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 1:35 am

    Boy, you guys sure have convinced me! We need a guy in office with experience. I mean his temperament, his lurchings on policy, the inspired choice of a creationist nitwit trollop for VP – that’s the kind of leadership only experience can grant!

    Seriously, you guys might want to spend less time on liberal blogs and more time calling the precious, dwindling commodity known as “republican voters.” Actually, no, wait. Spend more time copy/pasting talking points in the comment sections of liberal blogs. Nothing is happening in the next few days that is more important. Really! I’m a swing voter and I am curious if Obama should be president. And I heard he might be a muslim?? Please educate me.

39. kth Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 1:52 am

    Yeah, at fivethirtyeight.com today, they have about 20 pictures of McCain campaign offices that are either closed during prime time, or open but completely/nearly bereft of volunteers. In close states like New Mexico and Ohio. But by all means, keep trolling this liberal site with its DC-skewed reader base. That’s sure to push McCain across the finish line ahead of Obama.

40. 55 Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 2:15 am

    “P.S. Obama is a fraud; don’t be swayed by his slick marketing/lawyer background! Look at his record! Has he ever accomplished a single thing of significance? Think before you vote; vote experience over hype!”

    God, shut the fuck up. There are smart people here. You’re not going to convince anyone with such empty statements. McCain isn’t paying you enough to humiliate your state this badly.

41. El Cid Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 6:34 am

    The paid McCain hacks’ penetrating arguments have totally convinced me. They are clearly genuine and motivated argumentators and their points are in the high range of underdeniabilitativeness.

42. CitizenE Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 10:20 am

    There never has been a worst collection of foreign policy decisions during the past 8 years–the weirdest combination of ostrich like avoidance of international diplomacy combined with a military strategy that appears to have been designed (does one hear echoes of this in McCain’s campaign) to get half the world angry as hell at us, toss our treasury away, stretch our young men and women bravely putting their lives at risk thin as watery gruel, shed our national blood, kill tens if not hundreds of thousands, including civilianns–old folks, women, children–create the largest refugee population in the world, the largest internally displaced population in the middle east, on the wider front never, not once, close a deal, allow the terrorist group that attacked us to multiply and get a stronghold in tens of nations where it did not previously exist. As with the economy, science, the complete lack of competence on the world stage–the American populace have a real choice–four more of the eight before or a change–less drama, more realism, someone who wants to solve problems, using a scalpel where the right wing ax no longer cuts it.

43. mpowell Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 10:53 am

    Seriously, Virginia Voter, you should think carefully about the ‘leadership’ qualities of a candidate who appoints a nitwit like Palin to the ticket for purely political reasons. This is your political party that is making a joke out of itself.

    And if you’re the type of person that thinks Palin was actually a good pick, don’t listen to anything I have to say. Just go back to watching Fox News.

44. JonF Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 10:56 am

    Re: Drudge is showing that Zogby has McCain up in the most recent day to be posted at 1:00a EDT.

    Either Drudge was hitting the hooch pretty heavy last night (hey, it was Halloween party night!) or someone else was and so misread this. What the latest Zogby poll shows is that McCain has come up a point (c. 43%–>c 44%) since the last polling. It emphatically does NOT show that McCain is a point ahead of Obama. Now a point gain may be good news for McCain, but you can’t make too much out of it since the Zogby numbers are simply back to where they were last Monday and Tuesday.
    Apart from minor fluctuations, the national numbers have barely budged in any poll since early in October.

45. Evil Twin Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 11:25 am

    Effective (ha) Mailer: Ooh, Bush did cocaine and was a terrible President, Obama did cocaine and what, you fucking paid moron?

    With Bush we had someone with a bit more experience than Palin and was clearly an idiot. Remember the debates with Bush? He lost every one and the media gave him a pass. Just like Palin.

    So, yes EM, we should not elect the person most like Bush – Palin. And we get Palin with the guy who would joke about mass murder. We get Palin with the guy whose corruption goes back to the start of his Senate career and beyond. We get Palin with the guy who thought it was a good idea to slaughter the Iraqi people and still can’t explain why those innocents needed to die.

    So, if you want more dead innocents, more of Bush’s economic plan, and a government that cares fuck-all for the citizens of this nation – go ahead, vote for the guy who has experience in all those categories. Otherwise, vote for the guy working to make this a better nation.

46. SLC Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 11:47 am

    Re Evil Twin

    Note that Dubya also smoked pot and was an alcoholic with a DUI conviction under his belt. In addition to being a draft dodger of course.

47. SLC Says:
    November 1st, 2008 at 11:49 am

    Re virginia voter

    I don’t where Mr. virginia voter lives but up here in Northern Virginia, Sarah Palin is literally poison.

48. Marcos El Malo Says:
    November 2nd, 2008 at 12:44 pm

    I’m a California Republican, which gives me the luxury of voting for Bob Barr on Tuesday, and not having to hold my nose, close my eyes, etc. to vote for Obama, as I would if I lived in a battle ground state.

    McCain’s Palin pick alone should dissuade any thoughtful person from voting for him. That should be enough, but if it isn’t, one need only compare whom each candidate is relying on for foreign policy advice, noting that John McCain is in thrall to the same old gang of neocons.

49. levitra Says:
    March 2nd, 2009 at 4:44 am

    levitraI bookmarked this site. Thank you for good job!

50. viagra Says:
    March 11th, 2009 at 4:25 am

    Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.

51. tramadol Says:
    March 17th, 2009 at 2:22 am

    I want to say – thank you for this!
    tramadol

52. tramadol Says:
    March 22nd, 2009 at 6:04 am

    tramadol
    If you have to do it, you might as well do it right

53. cheap viagra Says:
    April 9th, 2009 at 5:13 am

    Excellent site, It was pleasant to me. viagra

54. seostarman5 Says:
    April 15th, 2009 at 4:05 pm

    I got a DUI ticket and my lawyers ( http://ticketvoid.com ) convinced the judge that the police don’t know how to administer the drinking test.

55. seostarman3 Says:
    April 18th, 2009 at 7:47 pm

    I promised my lawyer I’d pimp his site online ( http://ticketvoid.com ) after he got me off for drinking & driving. All charges we’re dropped today! Kudos