« The GOP's Great Hispanic Hope and Weekend Open Thread | Main | Happy MLK Day »

January 15, 2012


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

MR Bill

Last summer, I caught one of Huntsman's speeches on CSPAN and was struck by the way a message of reason and moderation was wrapped around a hard core of 'cut taxes for the wealthy/less regulation/austerity'. He was a vanity candidate, flattering himself he was the only reasonable person up there.

Here, the most fun has been the arrest of the GOP state rep who introduced a 'drug test welfare recipients' bill arrested for DUI..
And the Daily Show has been one county south in Ellijay GA all week, interviewing the patrons of Col. Oscar Poole's BBQ looking for Romney support. Pat Buchanan is a personal friend of Poole's, and I fear the patrons will sound like Squidbillies..It's an index of the GOP establishment's control in Georgia that they have decided to back Mitt this early.
Misting rain and 40 here. Supposed to work (after it rained Sat-Thurs, ending in snow flurries last week.. And I am cast as Tom in the Ray Cooney farce "Tom, Dick, and Harry" in the community Theater.

MR Bill

Here's the link to the Daily Show in Ellijay.

And didn't close parenthesis..

Paula B

Visit, pledge and forward the address of Elizabeth Warren's MoneyBomb:


from Ryan Grim on Huff Post:
The Internet has long threatened to upend traditional corporate-based campaign fundraising, giving supporters and candidates an easy way to connect. So far, however, grassroots online fundraising has largely been a supplemental part of a candidate's financial support rather than its foundation. A candidate fueled almost exclusively by small donors would be much better able to fend off advances from major corporate interests looking to sway a politician.

Warren's money bomb is set to coincide with the two-year anniversary of Scott Brown's victory over Martha Coakley in the special election to replace the late Sen. Ted Kennedy. Brown is marking the occasion by holding a major rally to launch his reelection campaign. The Republican incumbent took in $3.2 million last quarter, which paled in comparison to Warren's $5.7 million, but the senator has roughly twice as much cash on hand -- nearly $13 million compared to a bit over $6 million.

Prup (aka Jim Benton)

Huntsmn was always an irrelevancy -- except as a judge of the support the blimp's idea of the 'real Romney' would have received. (If he were still in the running, I'd challenge people here to an experiment -- why didn't I think of this before (*Gibbs slap* to my own head). It might still work. Find a friend or spouse and pick an average, mid-range middle-class bar where you aren't known. Go in, and after about ten minutes, get into a bar argument with each other -- not anything like a fight -- over 'which Republican candidate was the Governor of Utah.' Even now, if you aren't doing the test in Mass, DC, or Salt Lake City, I'll bet nearly half the bar will side with whichever of you insists it was "Romney, not Jon Whatzisname."

(Actually, I hope at least one of you really will try that test. It might make my point as to how little the average voter really knows or cares about even big poitical stories.)

Sir Charles

Mr. Bill,

That guy's got the look of the classic Republican hypocritical asshole. I am betting that this particular trangression just scratches the surface.

And yes, Huntsman really was something of a vanity candidate -- to follow up Jim's comment, what the race really needed was another right wing Mormon candidate who dresses up as a moderate.


I think there is no worthier cause than to send Senator Pick Up Truck packing and putting a real voice for progressives back in Ted Kennedy's seat.


I would never be surprised at how little the average voter knows -- disappointed yes, surprised no.

Paula B

To contribute to any Democrat's campaign in the upcoming federal election, go to Act Blue's directory of candidates at actblue.com. You can see how much candidates have raised and contribute through that site, or link to their own sites from that point.

Prup (aka Jim Benton)

Sir C: "I would never be surprised at how little the average voter knows -- disappointed yes, surprised no." And yet, continuing our running colloquy, if you step back and look at the arguments you've been making almost constantly, From 'the Tea Partiers are really racists, because they can't really believe this nonsense they are spouting' to 'I'll never understand the appeal of Republicans to anybody but rich old white folks' all of these arguments assume that these Republicans really (deep inside their heart of heart of hearts) know what the Republicans are saying and how nonsensical it is.

The exact same thing about the position you have neither taken nor rejected that 'we don't have to appeal to X group because Republican bigotry, puritanism, Christian extremism, or economic failure has made it ridiculous for a member of that group to vote Republican.' Realize the level of knowledge you are assuming in that assertion. (And too often other Democrats -- not you, or anyone here but a lot of commenters elsewhere -- confuse 'ignorance' with 'stupidity' and assume 'they're just too damn dumb to bother with.')

And why the hell should they know so much? Why should they understand those principles that make most of us Democrats -- when no Democratic Presidential Candidate has run on them since Walter Mondale? (And even he had the egregious "Representative from Archie Bunker's District" as his running mate, the worst racist to appear on a national Democratic ticket since John Sparkman in 1952. And while it would be unfair to compare President Obama with the truly repugnant Ms. Ferraro, both did get nominated largely because of assumptions of who they were based on the group they belonged to.) They, like more and more of the blogosphere -- there he goes again, Whoa Dobbin! -- see 'politics' as consisting of 95% Presidential election, and 5% 'annoying ads from people I never heard from and don't care about -- and in NYC probably aren't from my district.'

This is another reason your suggestion that the best way to get the House back is to work for Obama is wrong. He'll be 'running towards the center' because the DNC and the blimp still thinks that's the smart thing to do -- and because it is his natural 'post-partisan' inclination. (Imagining what he and they will consider 'the center' is a scary thought, given that he was willing to slash the budget as much as Republcians wanted and was only prevented by their arrogant greed. And since he's already nominated, he doesn't even need to make 'nods' to the Progressive wing -- I don't think he's a hypocrite, he means them too, like most of us he's not as consistent as he'd like to think, or we'd like to think.)

And if his opponent is Romney, he doesn't have to run on any issues at all. Romney can be and will be issue enough. The "Joe Isuzu" of politics, the man who thinks pretending to be an ultra-Conservative instead of the conservatve he really is is good politics, Bain Capital and "I like firing people." Obama does actually need to mention one issue anywhere in the campaign. (He will, but he can beat Romney with Romney alone.)

[break for domestic duties, but I'll be back before or after my nap.]

Sir Charles


I don't think that Obama will be running toward the center in quite the way that you assume. It seems to me that he is positioning himself to run a populist economic campaign, one for which Romney seems like the perfect foil.

I don't think I've ever argued against trying to make good left wing economic arguments to people or have ever suggested giving up on the white working class -- my recollection is that you have always been far more skeptical about this group than have I.

I am not a huge Ferraro fan and found many of the things she said in the 2008 election to be offensive. I don't recall her saying anything remotely like that, though, as Mondale's running mate. So I think the Sparkman comparison is a little over the top.

I think the best formula for taking back the House is a large turnout of traditionally Democratic constituencies. I am more optimistic about this possibility than you are. I guess we will have to see what happens.

Prup (aka Jim Benton)

A final pre-nap note: it is just the groups I want enthusiastic about voting that Obama is most likley to ignore or take for granted. One consistent problem -- we and the pros tend to think of 'minority districts' which usually vote for us. We forget that America's diversity is universal, that tere are Hispanics in Kansas City, Mormons in Vermont, Muslims in South Carolina, and gays everywhere.

It's those 'non-ghettoized' minorities that get totally overlooked. They don't count, if the districted ones vote for us. So they don't get outreach, they may not read the blogs of the politically active of their community, and they wind up voting other forms of 'their own interest.' (Remember 'interests' aren't just economic. The ultra-Christian who reuses to vote for a Mormon is acting in his own (eternal) interest, or so he sincerely believes.)

And remember, while reaching the gays in Kansas City might not swing any electoral votes our way, if they change their voting patterns, it might just affect Congressional, Gubernatorial, and State Legislative races that can be much closer.

Sir Charles


I think that one of the amazing strengths of the Obama campaign in 2008 was the focus on just this sort of thing. Huge turnout efforts in these communities delivered North Carolina, Virginia, and Indiana to Obama, as well as the electoral college vote for the Omaha Nebraska district.

Whatever the administration's flaws in office, their election strategy and logistics were remarkably strong and expansive. I saw it firsthand while volunteering in the hugely diverse suburbs of Fairfax County, VA and again on election day in the heavily African-American city of Petersburg VA. I think you are going to see the same type of effort this go-round, hopefully with similar results.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment