Candidates and Bloggers: Must We Agree?

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 12:19:22 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Following up on the last post I wrote about Taylor Marsh's response to those who think she's blogging for Hillary, I have a few thoughts of my own on how bloggers, particularly TalkLeft, covers campaigns.

I have long said that Hillary and John Edwards are my two favorite Democratic candidates. I haven't endorsed either yet and like most bloggers, probably won't before the first primaries. Any of the Democratic candidates will have my support if they win and there are none (except perhaps Joe Biden) I would be unhappy with.

All of the candidates' campaigns send out press releases and e-mails on issues, news and events to bloggers daily. I write about those that strike a chord with me on that particular day.

Like Taylor, I'm covering the 2008 election, not a single candidate. I write about Hillary the most because so far she is the most interesting candidate. She also has great campaign outreach through Peter Daou, her Internet communications director. He doesn't flood our e-mail boxes with every possible soundbite, but knows the individual blogs well enough only to send each those items he thinks would be of interest. As to what he sends TalkLeft, he's always on the mark.

No candidate is going to match my positions on issues or focus on those I care most about.

More...

That would require a candidate who vows as President to impose a moratorium on executions, close Guantanamo, try accused terrorists under the Code of Military Justice or in federal courts, insist Congress abolish mandatory minimum sentences, put a lockbox on my social security benefits and provide mandatory health care, including affordable and compassionate nursing home care, for the elderly. And of course, a candidate who as President would end the war in Iraq and promise not to get us into other wars preemptively or under false pretenses.

There is no such candidate who has a chance of winning in this presidential election.

Which means, instead of focusing on individual issues, I'm focusing on the candidates' overall values, their capacity to lead, their experience and yes, their likeability and electability.

I like Hillary. I think she's electable. I don't believe she's crafting her positions on issues to match expectations or popular opinion.

I like John Edwards. I think he's electable. I'm not sure about whether his more liberal positions in this campaign as compared to the 2004 campaign are genuine and lasting. I hope they are.

Big Tent Democrat has endorsed Chris Dodd.

You may disagree. That's why blogs have comments. Or, you can start your own blog.

< Hillary, Rolph and Taylor | Hillary Unveils Retirement Plan >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Candidates and Bloggers: Must We Agree? | 17 comments (17 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Dodd Mania! (5.00 / 1) (#2)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 12:38:32 PM EST

Peter is the best no question.

But a shout out (5.00 / 1) (#3)
by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 12:39:24 PM EST

to Matt Browner Hamlin and Tim Tagaris of the Dodd campaign.

Peter has a tougher job with me and he does a great one.

: I like the fact Hamlin not only (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by oculus on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 12:44:52 PM EST

posts on DK but also responds to comments. Class act. Doesn't seem to be garnering many supporters though.

"Dodd Mania." Maybe that's the (5.00 / 1) (#10)
by oculus on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 12:50:07 PM EST

slogan that will grab the Iowa caucusers.


thanks Jeralyn (5.00 / 1) (#6)
by taylormattd on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 12:45:18 PM EST

Those who question your motives in selecting the topics about which you write should just be ignored, IMO.

i'll bite, (3.00 / 1) (#7)
by cpinva on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 12:45:43 PM EST

how do you propose congress

put a lockbox on my social security benefits

sorry, from an economic standpoint, this makes no sense whatever. are you proposing that congress just let all FICA collections sit in a box, doing nothing, until they're doled out? do you do that with your personal retirement savings? probably not, most of us don't, and would look askance at anyone suggesting such a thing.

do you mean congress should set a fixed rate of return on your's & your employer's contributions? a fixed annual benefit? an indexed annual benefit amount? should congress invest those funds in higher risk/higher return equities?

please explain what you mean by this term, because no one ever does. they just toss it out there, and hope someone else can come up with something that doesn't sound too idiotic.

um (none / 0) (#8)
by taylormattd on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 12:46:44 PM EST

are you proposing that congress just let all FICA collections sit in a box, doing nothing, until they're doled out?

why would she mean that?


I've heard (probalby on NPR) (none / 0) (#9)
by oculus on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 12:48:11 PM EST

that the funds deposited for Social Security purpose are siphoned off for other purposes. CalPers would be the way to employ a lock box. Yes, invest the money, but the money and earnings stay at CalPers.


: In 1964 LBJ tossed the lock box away.. (none / 0) (#14)
by jimakaPPJ on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 02:07:51 PM EST

FICA revenue is put into the General Fund and then the FICA account is credited with an IOU from the General Fund. Plus (I think) interest of 1.5%...
The question is obvious. What happens when the General Fund can't cover its IOU's???

I'm saying (none / 0) (#11)
by Jeralyn on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 01:32:44 PM EST

I'm not an accountant. What I'm saying is I have paid into Social Security since 1965 and Medicare since 1966. 12.4% of my net earnings goes to Social Security taxes and 2.9% is taxed to Medicare.

I want the estimated benefits I've earned under current law. Congress has made and can make changes to the law at any time. I don't want my benefits decreased.


: Not an unreasonable request. (none / 0) (#12)
by sarcastic unnamed one on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 01:38:48 PM EST

Actually..... (none / 0) (#17)
by kdog on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 06:15:59 PM EST

I like the lockbox...that's how I save my money. To me it means just waht it says, a locked box of money not to be invested or spent in anyway. I don't think that's a bad thing.

Yeah, you get no interest but it's the only true zero-risk savings. Anything that garners interest involves risk, anytime you pass your money onto someone else you run the risk of never seeing it again. A savings account at Citibank is a risk, even with federal insurance.

I don't think Social Security money should be gambled, period. The more I think about, I think we should all try to get our money back right now before it's too late. As Jim pointed out, all we have now are IOU's from a shady organization. I'm not brimming with confidence in said organization....


I like Chris Dodd, too (none / 0) (#1)
by rustydude on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 12:34:22 PM EST

As for individual issues, I wish all Dem candidates would take a firm stand against the accretion of executive power that has occurred under Bush. I wish "rollback" was a common word uttered by all candidates.

And they could do it in such a way to attract the Broders of the world. Simply frame the Bush/Cheney power grab as a divisive element. Talk about rolling back Executive powers to produce a better working relationship with Congress. You know... that whole bipartisan angle. Joe Klein would write 3 favorable columns about it in a single month.

I didn't used to think Hillary Clinton (none / 0) (#4)
by oculus on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 12:42:33 PM EST

was "crafting her positions on issues to match expectations or popular opinion." Then I thought she was. Now, I don't know what to think. Are retired Generals Kennedy and Clark crafting her opinion on Iraq? Is whats his face O'Hanlon? Can't figure her out. How can she be in the lead in the Dem race if she doesn't respond to the public's opinion we should get out of Iraq?

Biden (none / 0) (#13)
by nellieh on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 01:40:33 PM EST

I'm in agreement with you regarding Biden. He is as responsible for the bankruptcy law a judge called terrible as any Republican. He didn't come by the name "Mr MNBA" by accident. With all the large companies incorporated in his state he has to kowtow to them. Hell, its their only industry! By the way when are the Democrats going to re-address that crummy law and change it back to the way it was. Now, if a person declares bankruptcy they are on the hook for life.

reality check (none / 0) (#15)
by Sumner on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 02:26:52 PM EST

Big Business for President

"no such candidate" (none / 0) (#16)
by Andreas on Tue Oct 09, 2007 at 02:59:30 PM EST

Jeralyn wrote:

That needs to be changed. To change that it is necessary to support a candidate who does not represent American big business but the working class.

I'm focusing on the candidates' overall values, their capacity to lead, their experience and yes, their likeability and electability.

All of that is irrelevant if they support wars (which they do).