blog.lancehaun.com

Democratic Primary: it looks more and more like Hillary Clinton is going to fight until the end for superdelegates. This is a road that almost everyone thinks is a bad one for Democrats; a fight until the bitter end and not winning the support of the entire party because of fragmenting of supporters and basically going against the will of the electorate.

Here is the problem with the argument (and here is where Hillary is, at least, historically correct). From 1968 to 1984, Democrats won one Presidential election. That election was one that the incumbent hardly put his heart into it (sorry to the three Gerald Ford fans out there). The superdelegate system was put into place because they wanted to bring the party closer to the center (and reduce the possibility of Carters, Mondales and McGoverns). It is quite obvious that superdelegates were put into place for undemocratic reasons (why would you need them unless they would overrule the people in favor of electability). If you are going to demand that superdelegates follow the will of the people, then it is actually Obama who is advocating a breaking of precedent and rule.  It is also a good argument that people who are chosen as superdelegates have much more to lose if they fall behind the wrong candidate so they would naturally aim for a winner. If you are a party leader, your job and position in leadership depends on it. If you are part of the congressional delegation, your electability is affected.

Everybody on the left was rubbing their hands in delight over a protracted and bitter Republican battle to the nomination. McCain is it though and people are already starting to think about him strategically against either candidate. Now it is looking as though the fight may be on the Democratic side and it is already looking like Hillary is through making appeals to the people and is content fighting for superdelegate votes. Millions of dollars to ads against each other instead of ads against McCain.

And while I may find talk radio to be pretty vile, please try to convince me that they won’t have a field day with this nomination contest if it becomes bitter. Meanwhile, McCain can punch it in for a few months, go to fundraisers and press the flesh with some of his biggest doubters. While McCain may need the rest more than Clinton or Obama, they could definitely be running on fumes by the time critical October campaigning is going on.

So says BBC.

Think there will be some excitement in Miami?

We are in her room after Jen’s surgery and everything is good. We are just chilling here, watching TV and surfing the net.

I know many of you wonder what exciting things I do on Friday nights. Well, it is a mish-mash of VIP parties, suite level tickets to sporting events, and this Friday, I’ll be spending it in an expensive, exclusive room overlooking Portland.

Jen is having surgery Friday morning on the hill and apparently they are keeping her overnight for observation. Of course, Jen told me “If you want to go out Friday, you should.” What the hell am I going to tell people when they ask about my wife? “Yeah, she’s in the hospital.” Talk about being a terrible husband. I would probably end up getting punched in the face.

Granted hospitals are boring and it sucks spending time there, I am still going to do it. So if you are up in the VIP wondering where I was, now you’ll know.

I don’t have any plans for Valentine’s day. Do you?

In other news, I think that it is official: lolcats have jumped the shark. There were obvious indicators of it already jumping the shark but I think a lolcat BIBLE is where the good stuff ends.

One of the fun things about politics is that things change very quickly, things are very fluid and there are a lot of aspects of it that are open to speculation.

Reading the political ticker this morning got me thinking about the Democrats continued ineptitude when it comes to running campaigns. Sure, you could point to success in 2006 but I think that only shows that voters are willing to look past that when the issues are seemingly important enough. You could also talk about Republicans lack of unity and party infighting that could hurt them. It seems like all of the hype behind the Clinton/Obama race is more in spite of what the party tries to do. Are we coming back to reality? Here is what I think is a beginning of how Democrats can lose in 2008:

Clinton dismisses weekend losses

You have to hope Clinton isn’t (or is, depending on what side you are) the nominee with quotes like this:

“These are caucus states by and large, or in the case of Louisiana, you know, a very strong and very proud African-American electorate, which I totally respect and understand.”

Clinton argued that caucuses are “primarily dominated by activists” and that “they don’t represent the electorate, we know that.”

“It is highly unlikely we will win Alaska or North Dakota or Idaho or Nebraska,” she said, naming several of Obama’s red state wins. “But we have to win Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, California, Arizona, New Mexico, Florida, Michigan … And we’ve got to be competitive in places like Texas, Missouri and Oklahoma.”

Let’s see here.

• Dismissing opponent wins in black strongholds assuming everyone voted based on race
• Writing off swaths of legitimate nominating contests and Democratic voters by assuming that caucuses do not indicate the will of the electorate
• Explaining that certain reliable red states are gone to the right months before election while inferring that certain reliable blue states are up for grabs if Obama is nominated

The Republicans have problems. If Clinton is selected as the nominee (and there are a LOT of bad ways that could go down), that would solve a lot of the Republicans problems.

Instead of arguing back and forth about which candidate will do better in a general election match up, why don’t you go to the site that, you know, compiles all that sort of information for you.

Oh, and if you’re super a-retentive and want to get technical on electoral college counts, the polling report has state by state results for a fee.

Hundreds of polls at your disposal.

Or you could of course continue arguing. I mean, if polling disagrees with you, it must be incorrect.

I know I have never been a fan of the talk radio zombies but I have to laugh at some of their theories about how voting for Clinton or Obama over McCain is better for their interests. It is strung together over seemingly one issue. I know this is going to come to a surprise but that key issue isn’t gay marriage, abortion or flag burning, it is immigration. Their argument goes as follows:

(Read on …)

I have been wrong all along so here is another go at it:

Democrats:

I have this pit in my stomach that Clinton is going to win big. I am going against that pit in saying that it will be a close race, but Clinton pulls ahead with the media and everybody else talking about “comebacks” and all that.  The only thing I really can’t see is Obama putting it away convincingly.

Republicans:

The big three candidates left are all going to pull states. I predict Huckabee will pull two to three, Romney will pull six to eight and McCain will pull the balance.  When delegates are counted, I think McCain will still be in the lead. If Huckabee drops out, people will split for both candidates fairly evenly defying simplistic media projections. When it becomes a two way race, things are either going to get incredibly civil or incredibly nasty. I can’t see any in between with these two.

Also, I get tired of candidates complaining about negative advertising. I realize it is an easy drum to beat and it rallies your supporters but it changes nothing. It costs much much more for a candidate to portray themselves positively in a compelling, memorable way than it does to paint your opponent negatively in a memorable way. That’s how it goes.

People don’t understand the entertainment value of Ann Coulter. It is not that her attempts to be entertaining and relevant are actually funny (they aren’t), it is that her actual attempts (and colossal failure) is funny.

Which is why this just knocks my socks off.

There is just so much stuff here in such a small space, it is good to see her put to use that big horse mouth of hers for something.

First of all, I would almost advocate Clinton being nominated simply because it would be a hilarious act to follow if Coulter actually followed through (which, I am assuming she would because she is the only one who takes herself serious enough). I’d love to see Clinton’s camp try to react to it too.

As far as the claim Clinton is more conservative than McCain? El Oh El. Even the loosest interpretation of what is conservative pegs Clinton far behind McCain in every major category. The fact that Clinton is a calculating and manipulative twerp with her vote should really seal the deal on top of it. You can guarantee yourself that when Clinton felt it was politically expedient to go right, she would do it. And worst case scenario, if you felt that McCain was the same way, he has gone left in far fewer instances than Clinton.

This is the ridiculous thing about people I am calling “the talk radio right” (so I may distinguish them from others who possibly have principles). Extending yourself out to hyperbole doesn’t work for me. Calling Clinton more conservative is just ridiculous and stupid not to mention a flat out lie when you look at the issues one by one. But most of these buffoons have three hours to fill.

All this talk about RINO’s is seriously getting old. Every candidate left in the race could be called a RINO. That was the charge leveled at Romney during his stint as governor and he certainly has the same problems with the evangelical far right due to his religion.  Paul certainly has been consistent and probably most conservative of the bunch but he has drawn the ire of the Republican party (and anybody who wants to connect conservatism to Republicanism in any way other than a loose, informal affiliation should have had a wake up call a while ago). Huckabee probably has the least problems because of his pandering (genuine or not) to evangelicals gives him a free pass for his major economic issues (worse than McCain in my opinion).

So “Wah wah wah” about RINO’s all you like. It is time to look past the party affiliation, past the who-is-more-loyal-to-the-party sort of mentality, past what the radio, TV or your internets sites say and actually, you know, research the flipping candidates. Who gives a crap if they are loyal to a party? That platform can change every two years. How about loyal to principles that you care about? I don’t know too many people who think the Republican party has grown well in the last eight years so is it bad to have a bunch of “RINO’s” running for office? We need something different than what Congress and the current President has given us. That is what Republicanism is all about right now. I don’t think many people would pick a continuation of the status quo.

In other news, there is no news. I have nothing even remotely personal to post about which is why the last umpteen posts have been about politics. Sorry.

…and it isn’t pretty.

Good for them. I don’t think I could give two shits about the Republican base any more. They’ve seriously screwed themselves out of their majority and if they want, they can screw themselves out of the Presidency too. They deserve it and are lucky that the party across the aisle from them is about as inept at getting their shit together as well because it makes it a close race.

And despite posts like this, I am mostly over debating politics with anyone at any length during this election cycle. So if I don’t respond to your comment, you’ll understand that I am doing it on purpose but not on a personal level. And no, I’m not going to stop posting about politics, just the debating part.