home

Monday Night Open Thread

By Jeralyn, Section Blog Related
Posted on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 08:50:21 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I've been out the past several hours. Did anything newsworthy happen?

This is an open thread.

< On Hertzberg's Defense Of Obama's Flip Flop On FISA | The Commander In Chief Test >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Monday Night Open Thread | 179 comments (179 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Is there a buyer's remorse poll on Obama? (5.00 / 0) (#1)
    by Saul on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 08:56:13 PM EST
    Is anyone taking a poll to see how many supporters if they could vote again in the primary would not vote for Obama.  Just curious to see how many there would be if any.

    Buyer's Remorse? (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:05:53 PM EST
    Polls are fun, and based on today's state polls there appears to be no buyers remorse. The tide is still all Dems.

    Iowa Obama +10
    Minnesota Obama +17
    Michigan Obama +8
    Colorado Obama +4
    South Dakota McCain +4
    Louisiana McCain +19

    The two biggest surprises. Minnesota by a big number for Obama and South Dakota by only a small number for McCain.

    Parent

    I was refering if they would now vote for Hilary (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Saul on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:09:59 PM EST
    not if the Dem would be leading in states.  That buyers remorse  

    Parent
    And of course (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by madamab on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:47:09 PM EST
    these are not swing states.

    Parent
    Except for. . (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by LarryInNYC on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:26:47 PM EST
    these are not swing states

    Iowa, Michigan, and Colorado.  And while South Dakota (McCain +4) is not a swing state, that's because it's normally considered safe Republican.

    Minnesota and Louisiana are not swing states.

    Parent

    Swing States (none / 0) (#74)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:35:45 PM EST
    To me a swing state is any state that can change from the last election. Since I don't expect any blue states to change color this election, swing states to me are: Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, and Virginia,

    Parent
    I was cribbing from this list. . . (none / 0) (#76)
    by LarryInNYC on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:37:42 PM EST
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swing_state.

    Parent
    If you're going to fling out polls (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Valhalla on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:51:24 PM EST
    like that, could you post links?

    These were all from today??

    Since his national lead is only 3 pts or thereabouts, these don't seem very representative.

    As well, none of the above means people aren't wishing we had a different nominee, it just means people will vote for him over McCain (not exactly a huge challenge, that)

    Parent

    Here ya go (none / 0) (#30)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:55:09 PM EST
    All Rasmussen except for Colorado and that was PPP.  Iowa, Minnesota, and South Dakota are technically released tomorrow. The others were today.

    Parent
    Survey usa (none / 0) (#147)
    by sleepingdogs on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 05:42:02 AM EST
    This is older polling (Pre-flip flop)  Minnesota shows McCain tied up even with Obama.

    Link

    Just thought I'd throw that out there.  I don't see any reason why there would have been such a huge swing in Obama's favor given the past 4 weeks worth of 'change' on his part.

    Parent

    There was a new oll on ABC News tonight (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by TimNCGuy on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:15:30 PM EST
    Over 70% believe McCain would be a good Commander in Chief.  Obama 48$.

    50% prefer Obama's timetable for withdrawl from Iraq.  49% prefer McCain's plan with no tmetables.

    Not very promising for Obama.

    Parent

    Does the 50% split equally (5.00 / 7) (#53)
    by Cream City on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:16:40 PM EST
    into three different groups preferring Obama's three different timetables, so far?

    Parent
    I wonder what percent (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by cawaltz on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:21:32 PM EST
    are cussing the two candidates out for their timetables? It isn't like we haven't told both of these numbskulls we out of Iraq for about two years now.

    Parent
    Ooooh!! (none / 0) (#108)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:58:29 PM EST


    Parent
    Americans views on Iraq (none / 0) (#156)
    by wasabi on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:07:22 AM EST
    I think the polls have been consistent for quite some time now. 70+% believe it was the wrong thing to do to get into Iraq in the first place.  Should be good for Obama on that judgement thingy.  However, roughly half believe timetables are necessary and half are convinced we are on the way to victory and any rush will cause us to lose.  Advantage, McCain?

    I think the news out of Afganistan and the military's latest attempt to request beef ups there and draw-downs in Iraq would help Obama if he can stick with his storyline.

    Parent

    Probably Arghh pollsters. (4.00 / 1) (#2)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 08:58:45 PM EST


    Parent
    I understand Obama dropped 12 poinst in 3 wks (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Saul on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 08:59:21 PM EST
    in the Newsweek poll.  Is that true?  Is it a dead heat right now between Obama and McCain?

    Newsweek Polls? (5.00 / 0) (#6)
    by Stellaaa on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:05:07 PM EST
    I remember in one they had him trouncing Hillary by 17points, seem to be their favorite number, the next week it was gone.

    Parent
    Funny (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by samtaylor2 on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:57:07 PM EST
    When that poll came out everyone was saying this poll is an outlier, now they use it as, he dropped 12 points.  

    I find the poll stuff stupid because they have no barring on my role in this election.  I will vote, volunteer and give money, but that is me.  I would do the same for any Dem.

    Parent

    People like to see polls (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Valhalla on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:34:46 PM EST
    For those who know how they'll vote, it's like watching the Olypmics, it's the competition.

    For those who don't know how they'll vote, they can use them as a sort of shortcut way to decide, IF they get big one way or another.  Many, maybe most folks like to be with the bigger crowd.  Which is why the big lead Newsweek and LA Times polls went viral all over Obama land the second they came out -- trying to rev up the crowd.

    And some folks are just fascinated by data and analyzing public opinion.

    Parent

    what does "outlier" in poll parlance? (none / 0) (#70)
    by DFLer on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:31:15 PM EST


    Parent
    In any statistical subject. . . (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by LarryInNYC on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:32:33 PM EST
    an outlier is the expected occasional value that falls outside of the statistically significant range.

    Parent
    As much as I would love to see (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Valhalla on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:23:18 PM EST
    a 12 point drop in the past month for Obama, and to be able to attribute it to his FISA vote, his faith based initiatives, and his backtracking/flip flopping/or whatever the hell that was on abortion, the earlier Newsweek poll was almost certainly an outlier.

    It was significantly higher than most other polls at the time, which had him up around 4-6 points, 7 at the peak.  Unfortunately there was also an LA Times polls at vaguely the same time that had him up by a lot, so those numbers, and not the majority of others at the time, went viral.  Rasmussen did a pretty good job (imo) explaining possible reasons for the outliers, mostly having to do with how well or badly those one-off polls estimate party identification.

    The current 3 pts up in Newsweek is much more consistent with other current polls covering the same period.

    Parent

    And Newsweek changed (none / 0) (#111)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:03:51 AM EST
    it's polling methods since the last one, apparently because of just that.  So I think you're right that there's no giant drop.

    Parent
    I still think Obama will win. Even with (4.50 / 2) (#5)
    by MarkL on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:04:15 PM EST
    all his flaws, this election has huge structural advantages for Dems.

    Parent
    not so sure- in order to hit 270 (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by kenosharick on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:17:38 PM EST
    he needs every Kerrey state (and I would not count on NH,Mich,Wis,or Penn) plus OHIO. The southern states are a pipe dream. Adding Colorado and another western state is not enough. The (almost sure) Hillary plan of the Kerrey states plus WV,Ohio,and Ark is looking pretty good to me right now.

    Parent
    CO plus NM (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by tben on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:38:40 PM EST
    plus IA are enough.

    But it seems that a much bigger win is possible. The latest EV estimates HERE.

    Parent

    Now, we told you to read carefully (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by Cream City on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:02:53 PM EST
    when it says "leaning."  That means only count solid states.  That means Obama is just below 240.

    Then you tell us why you think "leaning" states will lean some more be solid, and you add them one by one to show us how to get to 270.  That's how it's done.

    So do it.

    Parent

    If you look at graphs (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by cawaltz on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:32:39 PM EST
    the way thing are looking in PA isn't too promising.

    Parent
    Obama will not win (5.00 / 2) (#133)
    by MichaelGale on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:44:03 AM EST
    FL, OH, PA or Indiana and...it is doubtful he can win NC. That is what I predict.

    Also in the news; Obama will give a political speech at the Brandeburg Gate when he travels to Germany.  Merkel thinks it "odd".  The speech will be given at the same place Reagan made his "take down that wall" speech.

    Parent

    Obama ahead (none / 0) (#17)
    by tben on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:37:10 PM EST
    in PA by 7.7
    in OH by 4.5

    McCain by only 2.2 in FL

    Those are averages of recent polls at RealClear

    Parent

    Or Perhaps All Three (none / 0) (#21)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:44:14 PM EST
    I think, given the Dems roll this year, the Dems will take every state Kerry took plus Colorado, Iowa, New Mexico, Ohio, and will challenge and possibly win in Indiana, Virginia, Florida, Montana, North Dakota, Missouri, and Alaska.

    Depending on how bad Bush is between now and November (and I have every confidence he has been at his best since day one so is unlikely to improve) Obama will take somewhere between 304 and 358 electoral votes.

    Parent

    I understand that Obama is (none / 0) (#38)
    by Cream City on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:00:51 PM EST
    way ahead in Wisconsin?  

    Parent
    The Badgers (none / 0) (#80)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:39:31 PM EST
    I figured you would know the Wisconsin info. Looks like about +10 regardless of what polling outfit is giving us numbers.

    Parent
    So no more new polls (none / 0) (#92)
    by Cream City on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:00:52 PM EST
    but still with the huge lead that means I don't have to even bother with what to do with the top of the ballot.  Good.  It's hard work being in a swing state, so it's great to be off that list.  I can site back with the folks in the forever-red states.

    Parent
    I am SURE it will be a 50 (none / 0) (#177)
    by kenosharick on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 09:26:08 AM EST
    state OBAMA SWEEP!!!! Please come back to reality.

    Parent
    Va MIGHT (none / 0) (#45)
    by cawaltz on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:07:06 PM EST
    if they are able to get out the vote and if GOP folks don't get too excited about McCain. I wouldn't be betting it as a sure thing though. Webb barely eked out a win and that was with a SW town or two. Who knows though? Maybe Mark Warner can pull him up some.

    Parent
    No recent polling (none / 0) (#54)
    by waldenpond on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:20:34 PM EST
    I was just looking at RCP... PN...7,8,12, and 4...nothing since 06/22.   OH 11,6, -1 and 2... nothing else since 06/22.

    The trend wasn't good and I think some time for the past couple of weeks need to wear off.  I don't think there is a way to know yet.

    VA 20% AA, but I imagine the vote will be higher.  NC 28% AA...  McCain is up 4.5 in NC in the last poll and nearly 1 in VA.  Seems if the AA vote was going to flip either of these, the polling would have NC closer than VA.  Weren't both of these red in the last 3 or 4 of the last 4 elections?

    Parent

    Va was red last go round (none / 0) (#65)
    by cawaltz on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:27:52 PM EST
    barely. I don't discount McCain playing up his military service here though. We have the highest military retiree population. For that reason I think Obama could have some trouble here. His best shot is to hope Kaine and Mark Warner carry water for him. Both are pretty well liked and could possibly help him. He needs to shut up about Appalachians though and I definitely wouldn't talk about folks "being bitter and clinging to their guns and bibles".

    Parent
    To be studied after the election. (none / 0) (#87)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:50:02 PM EST
    Those are some great questions but ones I think Jeralyn would prefer we stay away from. I've been told that as soon as race is used in the debate here, the debate deteriorates in rapid fashion. It would be a great question for Sociologists to pursue after the election.

    There was a poll a bit ago saying what percentage wouldn't vote for a black, and if that's true then Obama started out behind the eight ball so to speak and has already nullified the part that gnaws at you.

    As to your first question, I don't think anything will cause a higher republican turnout this year.

    Parent

    A higher percentage wouldn't vote (none / 0) (#97)
    by Joan in VA on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:10:43 PM EST
    for a woman so he didn't start out behind as far as competing against Hillary.

    Parent
    He beat her with delegates and SD's. (none / 0) (#94)
    by Joan in VA on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:04:16 PM EST
    Not applicable to the GE. IMO the dynamics are different with a 2-party contest, anyway.

    Parent
    delegates (none / 0) (#159)
    by ccpup on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:27:59 AM EST
    and an undemocratic assist from the DNC to help him crawl over the finish line.

    Many people I know aren't voting simply because of that.  They're disgusted with the Dems' insistence on running the weakest candidate with the thinnest resume in history at a time when the race for the White House should be a cake walk.  Especially when his opponent outshined him at every single insistence and was obviously better suited for the job.

    But with Obama, the cake walk has turned into one bumper-car crash after another.  And this is BEFORE the 527s and the debates (um ... uh ... um) and town hall meetings and inevitable turning of the media against the Dem.  To successfully survive that, Obama's going to need a bigger cushion than his present Margin of Error.

    Parent

    I want Kevin Drum to comment. (none / 0) (#4)
    by MarkL on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:02:35 PM EST
    You may recall that my prediction was that you would see McCain up by 10 points. I think I said by the end of August.. not sure.

    Parent
    I heard something (none / 0) (#109)
    by gyrfalcon on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:59:35 PM EST
    about Newsweek having revamped its polling techniques since the last one they did, so I don't think these two are directly comparable.


    Parent
    CNN (none / 0) (#136)
    by Amiss on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 01:00:54 AM EST
    for what it is worth was reporting the same thing on Anderson Cooper.

    Parent
    Most polls are showing a dead heat (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by kenosharick on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:08:45 PM EST
    The fact that Obama is not ahead by 15-20% after the waves of positive press he has gotton should be worrisome to his campaign. His hardcore supporters have turned off many, including me. No "bump" for clinching, will he get one when he names his Veep? What will happen once the consevative, right-wing 527s really go to work?

    he did get a bump (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by tben on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:40:02 PM EST
    from clinching. He went from basically a tie, to a pretty constant 5-6 pt. lead, that is showing up in most polls.

    The EV situation is even better.

    Parent

    Limit 10 per Jeralyn (5.00 / 2) (#28)
    by waldenpond on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:54:04 PM EST
    I don't know if you caught it, but Jeralyn limited you to 10 comments per day.  You're at 14.

    Parent
    Not anymore (5.00 / 5) (#34)
    by Valhalla on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:59:56 PM EST
    Folks should go to RCP.  They're missing some recent polls, but those are generally the ones with smaller leads for BO.

    Right now the rcp avg is 4.0.

    Just July polls, avg is 2.3 apart.

    His bump was extremely small, since he was generally a couple of points up on McCain during the primaries.  When Clinton suspended, he went up 3 pts, 4 tops (excluding the ridiculous outliers like Nwswk), and has sunk back down now.  

    Without June polls in the mix, and even with some of them, he's within MOR.

    Parent

    spin it any way that makes you happy (none / 0) (#175)
    by kenosharick on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 09:15:25 AM EST
    your "bump" is almost the margin of error.  As for Ev- please do not tell you think Barack can win even ONE southern state. Penn and Ohio will be a problem as well. McCain also is not doing too bad in NJ.

    Parent
    McCain hasn't been in the media much for the (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by Grace on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 04:20:45 AM EST
    past few weeks.  Today, I saw him on there briefly because they asked him what he thought of the New Yorker cover with Michelle and Barack.  

    For a candidate who isn't doing much, he's doing pretty good in the polls.  

    Parent

    Not quite a dead heat (none / 0) (#12)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:21:25 PM EST
    McCain hasn't led in a poll in over 10 weeks. That's not what would qualify as a dead heat. And if anyone led in all polls by 15-20% we could all go to sleep until January 20th or until they found the proverbial live boy or dead girl.

    Parent
    Is there a website... (none / 0) (#25)
    by EL seattle on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:49:43 PM EST
    ... that has month-by-month national poll info from 2004, 2000, 1996, etc., etc...?  I think that might be a great way to get a sense of perspective this summer.

    Parent
    Real Clear Politics (none / 0) (#69)
    by standingup on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:30:40 PM EST
    is available via the Internet Archive.  The earliest date archived is Aug 16, 2000.  

    Parent
    Kerry up by 5 on this day 4 years ago (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by Valhalla on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:44:21 PM EST
    49.5 to 44.5 in the head to head.  Including Nader, it was 47.3 to 44.8.  That was the RCP average.

    WaPo/ABC had them tied.  Gallup had Kerry up by 5.  Ras had Kerry up by 3.  

    Kerry up on PA and FL.  Bush up in NC and SC.

    Parent

    That is unfortunate, because so (none / 0) (#119)
    by hairspray on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:14:37 AM EST
    many commentators have likened this election to Dukakis (1988) that it would be good to see some comparisons.

    Parent
    You mean for earlier years we have to go to the... (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by EL seattle on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:33:02 AM EST
    ...library ???

    Gasp!  Not the microfiche!  Not the microfiche!!!

    (Actually, I think backs of the NYT are online through our library.  But that's still work, and work is so not "Web 2.0" on a Monday night.)

    Parent

    Don't tell me about Microfische! (none / 0) (#132)
    by hairspray on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:39:40 AM EST
    I spent five years pawing through research articles on mf trying to support my dissertation. What do they use to paste the copy to, dried jello?

    Parent
    That's how I ended up with bifocals (none / 0) (#137)
    by Cream City on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 01:09:01 AM EST
    before the age of 40, after five years of diss. research on microfiche and microfilm, reading old newspapers . . . which looked like they needed new type even when they were printed a century before.

    Parent
    Obama's first general election ad (5.00 / 5) (#31)
    by Leta on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:55:56 PM EST
    I was humming along to Obama's ad--the heartwarming one with his grandparents, single mother, faith, values, acoustic guitar--and I happened to read the writing at the end.  He cites several laws he helped to pass.  For fun, I googled the final law, public law 110-181.  I found records of the vote on several government sites, but he did NOT vote for it.  LOL.  Is this possible?  Did I look it up incorrectly?  I can't believe any candidate would lie in his (or her) first general election ad.  I mean, who does that???  Wouldn't the media have mentioned it?  You all here at this site seem to know a lot, and I was wondering if any of you know the truth.

    Thanks!

    I like factcheck.org for these things. (5.00 / 4) (#39)
    by madamab on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:02:38 PM EST
    It is quite exhaustive on the mistakes in that ad. :-)

    Parent
    Ouch. And that still misses (5.00 / 2) (#47)
    by Cream City on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:11:30 PM EST
    some borderline claims.

    I. Am. So. Sick. Of. That. Ad. Here.  Why is it running in Wisconsin, anyway, since Obama supporters tell me that this won'be a swing state again and will be a walk?  Cool.  I can leave the top of the ballot blank and get back to work sooner on a busy Tuesday.  Maybe my state being a sure thing will keep down the turnout and the lines at the polls, too.

    Parent

    Cream...hope there aren't any bitter, (4.00 / 4) (#51)
    by PssttCmere08 on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:15:01 PM EST
    clingy people there... :)

    Parent
    We're all bitter, clingy people (5.00 / 3) (#55)
    by Cream City on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:20:42 PM EST
    here, because we're Midwestern people, and that's who Obama dissed.  Except, apparently, for Chicagoans.

    But my state fills the bill best for what he likes least, because we're one of the leading states in the country for churchgoing and guntoting -- often on the same day, at the en masse blessings at the start of hunting season.:-)

    Btw, I hate hunting and guns.  But I like blessings.

    Parent

    You ARE bitter, clingy people. Poor (none / 0) (#68)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:29:45 PM EST
    ole Brett Favre wants to leave, but, no . . .

    Parent
    Ohhh. The agony of it all (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by Cream City on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:09:36 PM EST
    as Favre becomes quite the drama queen.  It must be five years in a row now that he puts us through the will he-won't he routine.  Maybe more.  I lost count.

    Yesterday's sports page in our biggest paper here was something to see -- a photo of Favre across all eight columns but photoshopped into a Bears uniform.

    We hate da Bearssss.  But we also have a young QB who had bided his time and finally could move up, and we have a management that bent over backwards, over and over, when Favre made noises last spring that he might want to come back after all.  Then he decided to stay retired -- until a last-minute drama again.  Give him one more year and maybe lose the long-term future for the team?  Nah.  

    Parent

    Did you get around to reading (none / 0) (#98)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:11:05 PM EST
    The Fourth Hand yet?

    Parent
    Still on the stack! (none / 0) (#101)
    by Cream City on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:28:44 PM EST
    Finally got through more than a dozen textbooks to review to pick one for a course -- which meant more decisions about add-ons than I could have imagined, with all the new technologies and options since last I taught it.  Then I got caught up in reading about Acadia, part of my origins, while also getting through Attack Poodles, another recommendation here and oh-so-timely still. And now I'm slogging-- it's fascinating but slow work -- through Sundown Towns, yet another recommendation here.

    I'm definitely overdue for some fiction.:-)  

    Parent

    FICTION! Yes! (none / 0) (#110)
    by oldpro on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:01:58 AM EST
    I am near the end of a fabulous novel, hating for it to end so I'm putting off getting back to it tonight.

    If you haven't read it, Ann Patchett's "Bel Canto" is mesmerizing.

    Delicious.

    Parent

    I have. Good read. (none / 0) (#129)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:32:44 AM EST


    Parent
    Yes, loved Bel Canto. (none / 0) (#146)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 05:27:32 AM EST


    Parent
    Now about that AP story re the (none / 0) (#135)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:53:25 AM EST
    microwaved lab rat.

    Parent
    He was on Fox this evening (none / 0) (#122)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:19:13 AM EST
    interview with Greta.  I don't follow sports AT ALL, but he said he was fine with the idea that Green Bay couldn't use him after his waffling (said he told them at the time he was waffling, even), but is a bit outraged they're apparently trying to keep him from playing with another team.

    (I report, you decide.  I know nuttin' about pro football or Brett Favre.)

    Parent

    I thought I was the only one (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:28:00 AM EST
    who knew nothing about sports and doesn't watch.  Glad to know I'm not.

    Parent
    I don't need to know much (none / 0) (#138)
    by Cream City on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 01:10:32 AM EST
    as I live with men.  In Wisconsin.  It's inescapable.:-)

    Parent
    And cheese curd! (none / 0) (#90)
    by MsExPat on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:57:14 PM EST


    Parent
    I allowed myself (none / 0) (#99)
    by Cream City on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:11:35 PM EST
    one fried cheese curd dipped in bleu cheese sauce just tonight, filched from a friend's plate.  1,000 calories a curd but worth every clogged artery. :-)

    Parent
    your factcheck article - (none / 0) (#153)
    by Josey on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 06:51:07 AM EST
    >>>>>The only national law in Obama's ad is the one that "extended health care for wounded troops," and it's dubious whether he can claim full responsibility for that one. H.R. 4986, which became public law 110-181 in 2008, includes provisions from several Obama-sponsored bills. His ideas made it into law, but Obama was not a sponsor or cosponsor of H.R. 4986 itself.


    Parent
    well, if all the other laws in his ad (5.00 / 1) (#157)
    by TimNCGuy on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:19:22 AM EST
    refer to his time in the IL state senate, he's in more trouble than I imagined.  From what I understand, his legislative record in the IL state senate was totally manufactured for him in his last year there by the senate leader who wanted to give Obama a record to run for US senate with.  Apparently the IL senate leader took all important bills away from the other memebers who actually had worked on them and put Obama's name on those bills instead.  THis was all possible because until Obama's last year in the senate in IL the repugs were in controll.  But, that last year the dems took over.  The other state senators who lost their recognition to Obama were not any too happy about it either.

    Since this has been reported in the press and I'm aware of it, don't you suppose the repugs are aware of it and will use it against Obama to attack his "supposed" list of accomplishments?

    Obama hasn't had the time in the US Senate to accomplish much yet.  So, he touts his IL state senate accomplishments instead.  But, those too can be easily debunked.

    Parent

    oh yes (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by ccpup on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:46:28 AM EST
    the Republicans are licking their chops over our "Nominee".  There's probably stuff they know that we, as of yet, have no clue about!

    As for not accomplishing much in the US Senate because he hasn't been there long enough, I just don't buy it.

    The Dem Leadership gave him a plum post to build up his foreign policy credentials -- Chairman of that Foreign Relations Subcommittee) -- which he just flat-out ignored.  Added it to the resume, but did absolutely nothing -- NOTHING! -- with it.  The Republicans will have a field day with that.  And can you imagine what they'll do with his quotes (when first arriving in the Senate) about not being experienced enough to run for President ? How it didn't make sense for him to even consider running since he was still trying to find the washroom!

    Even his votes to fund the war after crowing about being the anti-war candidate will be used against him.  

    If Obama were a better politician -- he's amazingly thin-skinned to criticism or to be questioned --, he could pivot away from those attacks and change the subject.  But he has a tendency to become personally offended and think before he speaks which leads to the inevitable pause which then helps give time for the attack to settle and for people to wonder 'what's he hiding and why isn't he responding?'

    I hope they're working with him on this, but, in light of his penchant for not liking hard work, I have my doubts.

    Parent

    "Amazingly thin-skinned" (none / 0) (#181)
    by Cream City on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 10:27:51 AM EST
    is starting to resonate even with the Obamamad like John Nichols, whose recent column wearily admitted that there is 'way too much whining from Obama's camp.

    To paraphrase somebody or other on this blog, Politics Is Politics.  And politics as it is played by the Chicago machine, padding a resume in record time for someone with no record, does not work once out of the realm of part-time podunking in a state legislature.  This is Politics with a capital P now.

    Parent

    It would be odd indeed. . . (none / 0) (#154)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 06:55:23 AM EST
    to see Obama as a sponsor of a bill in the House, wouldn't it?

    Parent
    Heh (none / 0) (#172)
    by Steve M on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 08:58:06 AM EST
    H.R. 4986 is the frickin' National Defense Authorization Act for 2008.  Who the heck cares about the sponsors of an omnibus bill?  Sometimes Factcheck does strange work.

    Parent
    Yes, but what surprised (none / 0) (#189)
    by Leta on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 05:56:44 PM EST
    no, SHOCKED me, was that Obama did not vote for public law 110-181.  He did not vote at all, apparently.  I can understand a pol padding credit for something, but he didn't even vote for the bill.  Do you think he'll send be back the twenty dollars I sent him last January?  I need it now.  I want to buy a six pack of really good beer.  Maybe a bottle of Jack would be more on point, LOL.

    Parent
    He may not have showed up to vote (5.00 / 8) (#41)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:03:46 PM EST
    But he assures you no one did more to make sure it passed.


    Parent
    I can hear Hillary Clinton holding forth (none / 0) (#37)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:00:45 PM EST
    in a debate on such an error.

    Parent
    Isn't Obama down a bit on Intrade? (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by MarkL on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:14:24 PM EST
    I think he was in the mid-70s a few weeks ago. Now he's at 66.

    ABC/WaPo poll (5.00 / 2) (#75)
    by waldenpond on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:36:34 PM EST
    It looks like a trend, though I'm sure there will be many changes.

    ABC...There's partisanship, as well, in views of Obama's readiness as commander-in-chief.

    McCain 72%, By contrast, fewer than half, 48 percent, say Obama would be a good commander-in-chief, a significant weakness on this measure.
    Sixty-nine percent of Democrats say he'd do well in this role; just 44 percent of independents and a mere 19 percent of Republicans agree. Majorities in all three groups, by contrast, say McCain would be a good commander-in-chief -- 56 percent of Democrats, 74 percent of independents and a near-unanimous 94 percent of Republicans.

    Parent

    Ah, but just you wait until Sen. Obama (4.66 / 3) (#78)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:38:32 PM EST
    returns from his overseas tour.

    Parent
    that same poll (none / 0) (#158)
    by TimNCGuy on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:21:59 AM EST
    listed the voters preference on Iraq proposals as

    50% prefer Obama's plan for withdrawl with time tables.

    49% prefer McCain's Iraq plan with no time tables.

    Not very promising on the one issue that is supposed to favor Obama.

    Parent

    Economy still going to hell. . . (5.00 / 4) (#82)
    by LarryInNYC on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:43:12 PM EST
    in a (Republican) hand basket.

    The media were clearly expecting on up day on the stock market based on the Bush Administration's rescue plan for the GSEs.  But really, can you imagine anything more scary to the financial community than the statement "We're the Bush Administration and we're here to help with your finances?"

    Well, "I'm Barack Obama and I'm ready (5.00 / 4) (#84)
    by MarkL on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:44:55 PM EST
    to lead the military" comes close, for many.

    Parent
    Obama has no magic pills to fix the (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by Grace on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 04:33:41 AM EST
    economy.  If anything, he's more tentative and unsure than McCain is -- and McCain hasn't exactly had any bold ideas on how to fix the economy either.  

    The economy is a huge HUGE mess.  Worse than Iraq.  

    One of the things that bugs me about Obama is a "style" issue.  He's not firm on anything he says.  It's all subject to changes and refinements and it leaves me with no confidence that he can handle anything -- I mean anything at all.  I feel like everything he says is going to be changed a little later....

    I don't think that is a good thing.  

    Parent

    No one has a magic pill. . . (5.00 / 1) (#152)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 06:20:40 AM EST
    to fix the economy.  But it's hard to imagine anyone worse than McCain who seems to change his economic policies twice a day to suit the crowd he's talking to.  

    Parent
    it's not just what he says (none / 0) (#164)
    by ccpup on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:56:23 AM EST
    and the fact it will more than likely be refined, it's also how he says it.  He either sounds unsure -- like he's still figuring the issue out -- (which doesn't exactly inspire confidence) or, if he tries to sound resolute or like a "leader", he comes off sounding like he's lecturing his audience or a Bible Belt preachere.

    With McCain -- like him or not -- he doesn't need to reach for sounding experienced or strong because people are already familiar with those aspects of his biography which indicate both his strength and experience.  He just answers the question (or not) and the Media gives him either a pass if it's confusing as h-e-double hockey sticks or a leg-up if it's an out-and-out mistake.

    It's hard to believe people are getting excited about poll numbers this far out and without the Democrat's Nominee having been subject to one 527 ad or having taken part in one debate or town hall meeting.

    Those are things that help define a candidate -- for better or worse -- for the Electorate.  And if you're Obama and have alleviated people's fears about your readiness to handle the job with slick ads, but then falter in the debate with a string of ums and uhs and look even remotely unsure of how to answer the question, that irretrievable drop in the polls could be breathtaking.

    Parent

    I don't know why anyone thinks (4.20 / 5) (#93)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:02:26 PM EST
    Obama would be better.

    Parent
    My seven year old daughter. . . (none / 0) (#151)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 06:18:03 AM EST
    would be better.

    Parent
    just don't (none / 0) (#165)
    by ccpup on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:57:45 AM EST
    put her on Access Hollywood, okay?

    :-)

    Parent

    I wouldn't think of it. (none / 0) (#167)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 08:20:09 AM EST
    However, I might not be able to stop her from auditioning -- she's pretty out there.

    Parent
    typical (none / 0) (#169)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 08:36:23 AM EST
    it's not that we know Obama will be any good.  It's that McCain is that bad.

    Maybe it's not always evident from the question, but I find it funny that even the most level headed people would rather resort to that sort of rhetorical desparation ("he can't be worse") than give just a little credit to a Clinton.

    Your simple answer is this, my friend:  we know he will be better because it has been proven that a democrat knows how to handle the economy.

    Parent

    The reason I think Obama. . . (none / 0) (#170)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 08:46:01 AM EST
    will be better is because it would be hard to be worse than McCain, who has virtually no interest or knowledge about the economy and admits as much himself.

    You asked a question, I answered it.  Obama will be better than McCain because McCains sucks so enormously anyone would be better.  But more than that, Obama has a number of Clinton I economics people working for him -- I can't imagine a better recommendation for handling the economy.

    Clinton doesn't enter into your question one way or another.  She'd also be enormously better than McCain.  But the choice in November is between McCain and Obama.

    Parent

    well (none / 0) (#171)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 08:54:09 AM EST
    McCain isn't bush.  Bush doesn't enter the equation one way or the other.

    If that's how one chooses to look at this party branding issue, well ok then.

    Parent

    Neither does. . . (none / 0) (#173)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 08:59:27 AM EST
    Bush doesn't enter the equation one way or the other.

    Fred Flintstone.  So perhaps it's appropriate that I didn't mention either of them.

    Since you choose to bring up Bush, however, it ought to be clear that McCain has now signed on to the Bush economic policy in full.

    Parent

    I don't know about that (none / 0) (#174)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 09:09:25 AM EST
    but we have made it clear I guess that Obama has not signed on to the economic policy of Clinton.

    Parent
    If Obama (or Clinton, for that matter). . . (none / 0) (#176)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 09:16:28 AM EST
    has a specific economic plan, I haven't seen it.

    However, I believe that Robert Rubin in advising Obama and that's a pretty clear indication of the direction Obama is planning to go in.

    Parent

    So he is (none / 0) (#178)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 09:27:13 AM EST
    signing on to the economic policies of Clinton?

    I think he'd be wise to embrace that economic vision.

    Upon Rubin's retirement, President Clinton called him the "greatest secretary of the Treasury since Alexander Hamilton."

    Instead of just protraying himself as someone who can do no worse than McCain.


    Parent

    Well, HE'S not portraying himself. . . (none / 0) (#179)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 09:33:12 AM EST
    as someone who can't do worse than McCain.  I am.  If you ask him, I'm sure he'd tell you that no one has done more for the US economy than he has.

    Parent
    Jeralyn, how do you think the CO (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Joan in VA on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:46:49 PM EST
    Unborn Personhood Amendment will effect the results in November? Lots of rabid right-to-lifers there or not so much? 130,000 sigs put this on the ballot but that may be every one they could find.

    Well methuselas baby (5.00 / 1) (#120)
    by Valhalla on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:14:53 AM EST
    I don't know what you said that got you deleted, but many of us have had comments deleted here and there.  When it's a hot topic it's easy to go over the line.  I hope you reconsider.

    Oops, I'm really messing up tonight (none / 0) (#128)
    by Valhalla on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:29:21 AM EST
    this comment was supposed to go under methuselah's baby's comment downthread about being deleted.

    Parent
    Indeed. (none / 0) (#131)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:39:00 AM EST
    I lost what I viewed as a similarly serious comment once when referring to a Jeralyn post as feeding the piranhas. That was before discovery of the cookie theory. I still want to use piranhas or squawking parakeets in a serious post but chips ahoy have done their job to perfection and calmed the rabid keyboard.

    Parent
    Please write your Congresspeeps (5.00 / 1) (#121)
    by jen on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:16:13 AM EST
    to oppose lifting the ban on offshore oil drilling.

    Here's a good article to gather tips for letters:

    Dear 44: Drilling only benefits Big Oil

    by Daniel J. Weiss @ Politico

    I wrote my congressmen (none / 0) (#145)
    by Wile ECoyote on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 05:13:42 AM EST
    Telling them to open more drilling and to push nuke.

    Parent
    I read about Long Beach's (none / 0) (#149)
    by Grace on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 06:11:34 AM EST
    "Fantasy Islands" today.  I don't know why we don't encourage more drilling if it would create more monumental art projects like this.  

    California disguises oil rigs (amazingly enough, there is an oil rig in Beverly Hills but it's disguised as a high rise building).  

    Anyway, if everyone hid their oil rigs, would we have more of them?  

    Parent

    Been to England lately? (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by Cream City on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 01:35:30 AM EST
    A friend going to Europe for the first time a few weeks from now, for only a couple of weeks as a tourist, is freeking.  Maybe somebody can offer calming advice.  His passport is good through the end of this year, but he read in WaPo that "most countries" now have entry requirements that mean refusing passports that will expire within six months.  No time now to get a renewal in time, with the slowness on those.  

    We've been checking lots of sites -- official ones at this end and there -- and they're vague and/or contradictory.  He'll try to call the closest British consulate tomorrow.  But is there a problem getting into England with a passport due to expire within six months?

    And in case he can get across the Channel -- plans still are being finalized with another friend -- are there countries where it would be a problem?

    Thanks for any advice.  And you can bet I saved all the good advice to commenter Dalton on where to find good fish and chips, curries, etc.

    I travel a lot (none / 0) (#166)
    by ccpup on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 08:02:23 AM EST
    between both London and Paris and don't remember there being any question about my passport's expiration date.

    It's recently been renewed -- was due to expire last March -- but most customs officials (in Paris at Charles de Gaulle Airport, at least) barely look at the passport when they stamp it, so I doubt there will be a problem.

    When I had my passport renewed, I paid for it to be expedited as I had yet another trip planned and they had it to me within a week.  A week!  So, that's one option your friend might be able to consider.  If they have the ticket with the date, it could be expedited so he can make that plane.

    Parent

    Denver and Buses (5.00 / 1) (#148)
    by Katherine Graham Cracker on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 06:09:40 AM EST
    I understand the DNC's plan is to provide buses to bring people to the stadium for the big speech.
    According to a transportation manager, the cost to bring in enough buses to take even half of the people attending is going to be 6.5 million.
    Bus per day ( charter rate) ~$500

    Driver per day                   ~$250
    per diem                          ~$150
                                           ~$900

    3 days                            ~$2,700

    fuel                                 ~$4,000

    1 bus for the speech      ~$6,700  

    Let's say that 1/2 the folks ride buses and they able to make 7 Round Trips from some pick up and delivery site -- and that would probably leave a few grumpy folks.  

    1,000 buses

    somewhere in the neighborhood of $6,500,000

    What a waste of money!!! DNC donations. (none / 0) (#160)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:31:05 AM EST
    And all just to show a big rally and lots of people. It seems almost like a Billy Graham, the Pope, or Stones concert. Other images of foreign leaders come to mind. I just don't think it is necessary, IMO. Maybe a little too much pagentry. Some people will be thrilled but others might wonder how a government which is credit card maxed right now not be wasteful under this Dem's administration. And what is the additional security costs? Is this Donna's idea? Heh.

    Parent
    Poor Denver. All that bus exhaust (none / 0) (#182)
    by Cream City on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 10:34:56 AM EST
    (ugh, what is it with bus pollution?) spewing into the lovely mountain air.  

    But with the site is almost next door for the delegates and others at the main convention site, so a lot of walk-ins -- as many as half of attendees, as you suggest -- it will be interesting to see how the usual Obama rally security is amended.  Or not.  They can't checkpoint everyone coming in by making it possible only by bus ala Unity, NH.  

    Parent

    Denver is not in the mountains (none / 0) (#186)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 11:53:56 AM EST
    It sits in a bowl/valley. It is this placement that can also cause an inversion in which the air is trapped under certain conditions.  That's when the air pollution stays with us and the "brown cloud" appears.

    On a good day the prevailing winds blows to the East, so it is Kansas and points East that gets the pollution.  

    Parent

    Nobody posts Hillary is God (4.00 / 4) (#150)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 06:13:43 AM EST
    and Obama is a jerk.  I haven't seen one single post of that nature even once but I have seen Obama supporters show up here on certain days and post the same post over and over and over again hoping to I guess beat people to death with their opinion.  That is when Jeralyn steps in and limits comments, to enable posters with that particular problems to focus on making meaningful thoughtful comments.

    this comment is so absurdly (none / 0) (#184)
    by tben on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 11:44:42 AM EST
    at variance with reality, that it is hard to know how to respond.

    Parent
    Feel free not to (5.00 / 2) (#187)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:40:26 PM EST


    Parent
    Tben is being banned (none / 0) (#190)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jul 28, 2008 at 07:57:29 PM EST
    aside from igoring warnings, I just learned he has been banned using two other user names. That's against the rules.

    Parent
    Apple sold 10,000 iPhone 3Gs! (none / 0) (#11)
    by jerry on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:21:16 PM EST
    Okay, actually they sold a million.  Good for Apple!

    Anyone at TL going to netroots nation? (none / 0) (#13)
    by jerry on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:23:55 PM EST
    Apparently there is some enormous BBQ stuff your arteries full dining experience going on.  Sounds like a lot of fun really, though I worry about an event in which so many deskbound bloggers jam more lard into their arteries.  It would be very embarrassing next Monday to have more than one liberal blogger drop dead from a heart attack.

    Sounds like lots of fun though!

    Jeralyn is on a panel. (none / 0) (#15)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:32:03 PM EST


    Parent
    I'm blaming this erroneous info on BTD. (none / 0) (#88)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:51:57 PM EST


    Parent
    The Dems will purportedly power (none / 0) (#19)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:39:21 PM EST
    the environmentally-friendly vehicles of the VIPs with a by-product of beer.  

    Parent
    Wind powered? n/t (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Ellie on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:44:33 PM EST


    Parent
    Gods know (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by Nadai on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:45:27 PM EST
    there'll be enough hot air.

    Parent
    Yee of little faith: (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:49:46 PM EST
    Dem. Nat. Conv.

    Parent
    All the same, I'd rather have a beer with HRC ... (5.00 / 4) (#36)
    by Ellie on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:00:11 PM EST
    ... and not just because she'd call for a premium shot to be included!

    Parent
    Foreign Waste? (5.00 / 1) (#91)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:57:57 PM EST
    Lets hope they aren't using Anheuser-Busch waste for fuel or we'll be dependent on foreign Belgian beer waste rather than foreign oil.

    Parent
    Coors? (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:08:10 PM EST


    Parent
    Coors? (none / 0) (#102)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:33:14 PM EST
    Would the Dems use Coors? Sounds to me like we have a beer waste power problem due to a lack of politically correct beer waste.

    Parent
    Yes. (none / 0) (#106)
    by oldpro on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:51:31 PM EST
    And I thought we were boycotting Coors...

    This is not the Democratic Party I worked my fingers to the bone for...

    Parent

    Michelob Lite? (none / 0) (#114)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:06:34 AM EST


    Parent
    Stella Artois (none / 0) (#134)
    by oculus on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:52:16 AM EST


    Parent
    They may (none / 0) (#29)
    by echinopsia on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 09:55:02 PM EST
    but so far we're driving GM hybrids and fueling up at Denver city pumps with regular unleaded.

    I'm a volunteer driver for the host committee. There is no ethanol being used as yet.

    Parent

    Be glad you aren't filling that gas tank (5.00 / 1) (#35)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:00:09 PM EST
    in CA.

    Parent
    Yep, we're at 4.86/4.96 (none / 0) (#64)
    by waldenpond on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:27:13 PM EST


    Parent
    Gas costs more in states (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:08:24 AM EST
    that mandate special anti-pollution formulas.  CA does that big-time.  I'm embarrassed to say that Vermont is a couple cents cheaper than the rest of the NE because we don't.

    Parent
    Used SUVs at rock-bottom prices (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by Cream City on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:06:33 PM EST
    here and still not selling, since filling the tank costs $160 here, says a roundup report in our paper.

    The downside is a lot of workers can't afford even rock-bottom prices, since a plant that makes them here has closed.  Thousands more out of work, in addition to more thousands before -- every week now.

    Parent

    This morning on Marketplace, (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:12:17 PM EST
    someone stated rental car companies are having trouble because everyone now wants a small, fuel efficient car, and the companies don't have enough cars of that description to meet the demand.

    Parent
    Doesn't anyone wonder what the leaders (5.00 / 0) (#124)
    by hairspray on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:23:06 AM EST
    at the big three automakers were smoking for the last 15 years?  They HAD to have seen the handwriting on the wall, or were they really that dumb?

    Parent
    $4.13 in NE Penna (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by BarnBabe on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:12:51 PM EST
    It is actually $3.99 in town. And where do they get $160. I have a Envoy and fill it at around half every 2 weeks. Runs me $40-45. Yeah, living in the country and only a few miles from work does have it perks. We go to Sams less and double up at the grocery store. The killer is the lawns. We love mowing in the summer. I am getting better mileage with the SUV. Ha. Mine is an 06 and just turned 10k miles on it. . The real big scary problem is the $4.329 heating oil. Everyone is getting wood stoves as back up. But what are the little old widows suppose to do? Half their SS check each month for heat.

    Parent
    Heating oil situation (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:13:47 AM EST
    is really, really scary.  People are literally going to freeze to death with a tank full costing $1,000 and up.  Elderly or inform without much family to do the heavy lifting can't cope with wood heat.

    Parent
    If you NEED 4WD (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by echinopsia on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:47:38 PM EST
    You could be smart and buy a Subaru - with AWD, which is even better in snow and has a lower center of gravity. Mine gets 30 mpg.

    Parent
    National car of Vermont (none / 0) (#117)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:10:38 AM EST
    (along with elderly Ford pick-ups and Jeep Cherokees)

    Parent
    Imagine what fun (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:09:52 AM EST
    it is in rural areas, where the general store is 3-5 miles away and the nearest supermarket 20 or 30, and large vehicles with 4-wheel are a survival requirement.

    Parent
    Where I went to college (none / 0) (#144)
    by Grace on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 04:49:51 AM EST
    it was 7 miles to the nearest street that had anything on it.  Of course, after you drove the 7 miles, there was fast food, grocery stores, pizza, and everything else -- but it was a 7 mile drive to hit that street.  Otherwise, NOTHING.  Not even a 7/11.  

    Parent
    Green! but also multicolored (none / 0) (#42)
    by Valhalla on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:04:29 PM EST
    the good that is, by regulation.

    Parent
    Oops, that's 'food' not 'good' (5.00 / 0) (#60)
    by Valhalla on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:24:41 PM EST


    Parent
    No Cookie Fix (none / 0) (#103)
    by CoralGables on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:47:07 PM EST
    Cookies can't fix that kind of error.

    Parent
    Although I believe I should test the cookie (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by Valhalla on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:06:23 AM EST
    fix...in the interests of science.  Off to the kitchen...

    Parent
    What exactly is Netroots nation? (none / 0) (#43)
    by bridget on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:05:57 PM EST
    I am not getting around the net very much these days. Sometimes I follow a link but haven't visited  dkos for the longest time and don't read anything over there anymore.

    Last year I heard that yearlykos was to get a new name. Is that Netroots nation?

    Will dailykos also be changed to Netroots nation?

    Please tell all ;-)

    Parent

    As I recall, this year's Yearly Kos is (none / 0) (#46)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:08:22 PM EST
    called Netroots Nation.  Can't remember why.

    Parent
    Netroots Nation (none / 0) (#57)
    by bridget on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:20:50 PM EST
    just found the site

    http://www.netrootsnation.com/

    guess dkos will remain

    did anyone else read too last year that dkos would be renamed netroots nation?

    Parent

    Yes, they changed the name from (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by BarnBabe on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:34:27 AM EST
    Yearly Kos and it was announced last year at the 2nd YK. They thought it was more inclusive of all blogs and not just DK and it is in Texas this year. I enjoyed the first two years but that was when you could have a choice of opinion.

    Parent
    "Netroots Nation" deceives net newcomers (none / 0) (#188)
    by bridget on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 03:31:06 PM EST
    There was plenty of Hillary Clinton bashing going on during the first YearlyKos in 06 - and when she appeared in 07 they never let her forget her appearance there with all those nasty comments

    Too bad she decided to go there in 07. Huge mistake because the bloggers often responded like children later. With Total lack of integrity and professionalism.

    btw. Dowd wrote how Moulitsas trashed HC in 06, he didn't keep his Clinton hatred a secret - basically he was pushing his favorite pols like Warner but maligning the Clintons was always number one on the list IMO

    I still have to lol@Warner's ice sculptures and the parties where the dkos people appreaciated food and drink .. that was  hilarious.

    I think Moulitsas changed the name so he wouldn't be immediately associated with anything negative going on there ... that doesn't mean he and his minions don't keep ruling the show

    yearlykos was never inclusive just like dkos was never inclusive - but now it is practically a cultish club ... no wonder he has to deceive the
    newcomers on the net with a new presumptious name like Netroots Nation.

    Parent

    I thought it was just the annual meet-up. (none / 0) (#66)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:28:01 PM EST
    "Netroots Nation" wouldn't be an accurate title for DK at present given the ostracism of the Clinton supporters.

    Parent
    Maybe it's called "Netroots Nation"... (5.00 / 5) (#139)
    by EL seattle on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 01:30:44 AM EST
    ... because the title "Obamapalooza" was already spoken for ?

    Parent
    ITA and I thought the exact same last year ;-) (none / 0) (#77)
    by bridget on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:38:27 PM EST


    Parent
    No, I'm not going (none / 0) (#56)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:20:46 PM EST
    I'm trying to go a year without getting on an airplane. I do this every five years or so. My last flight was Jan. 3 returning from Iowa to cover the caucuses. I'll probably only make it to September, since I have a work event I have to go -- but no Netroot Nations for me.

    I don't think I'm listed on any panels since I never signed up to go.

    It does look like fun thought and barbecue is great.

    Parent

    Good thing the Dem. Nat. Convention is (none / 0) (#67)
    by oculus on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:28:43 PM EST
    in Denver.

    Parent
    that was part of the reason (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by Jeralyn on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 10:41:50 PM EST
    I picked this year -- I was so happy when I learned it was here and I wouldn't have to fly to another city, stay in a hotel and raise thousands of dollars for the trip. In Boston, they credentialed bloggers so late all the hotel room blocks were gone. I ended up with five reservations of one night each at five different hotels -- it added to the exhaustion of covering the event.

    Parent
    Did you know that Colorado delegates (none / 0) (#105)
    by echinopsia on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:50:19 PM EST
    even the ones who live IN Denver, must stay in hotels and pay for them (at $300 a night) themselves?

    Parent
    Why? (none / 0) (#107)
    by zfran on Mon Jul 14, 2008 at 11:55:29 PM EST


    Parent
    Security and redentialing, apparently (none / 0) (#180)
    by echinopsia on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 10:20:24 AM EST
    They have to be assembled by 7 a.m. each morning to get their convention credentials for the day.

    Or so the delegate I talked to told me.

    Parent

    Please Delete My Account (none / 0) (#112)
    by methuselas baby on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:04:29 AM EST
    BTD censored something I wrote in sincerity, and meant with all my heart.

    I thank you all.
    Perhaps I am an extremist, but it's my background.
    I only meant well.

    I will continue to read and support your causes as my own, but I do not want to be tempted into censorship again.

    With Regrets,
    Javier Alfonso Perez

    everyone's stuff gets deleted all the time (5.00 / 2) (#123)
    by Edgar08 on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:20:12 AM EST
    although what I try to say I think is important, it's easy for me to rank deletion better than 50 people piling on my comment and lying to everyone else about what I meant when I posted the comment.

    Which is what happens on other blogs.

    Parent

    BTD Said His Comment (none / 0) (#125)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:25:47 AM EST
    was not directed at you.

    My comment was not directed at you.

    Your story is an interesting one though, so the error was in our favor. Thanks for sharing.



    Parent
    Also (none / 0) (#126)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 12:26:49 AM EST
    we cannot censor comments or edit them. Only delete. Are you sure your's was deleted?

    Parent
    VP final round - Hillary or Biden? (none / 0) (#155)
    by Josey on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:02:36 AM EST

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24764369

    Joe Biden is winning.... (4.00 / 1) (#161)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 07:32:07 AM EST
    ...but what else would you expect from HillaryHate Central. It's actually kind of surprising she made it to the finals.

    Parent
    I'll add one to her total (none / 0) (#168)
    by CoralGables on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 08:21:10 AM EST
    In a poll of this type why would anyone expect Hillary to win. Judging by this site alone, a large percentage of the people that voted for Hillary in the primaries have said they don't want her as Vice President.  Whatever their personal reasons are to feel this way, it surely isn't conducive to Hillary winning an online poll of this nature.

    I'm off to cast my vote for Hillary.


    Parent

    DNC Blog Problems? (none / 0) (#183)
    by ClearEye on Tue Jul 15, 2008 at 10:42:27 AM EST
    Does anyone know if the DNC blog is actively blocking grassroots posting by preventing new users from getting the required "blog name", or is there some kind of software incompatibility issue?  http://www.democrats.org/blog.html I can sign on to the site, but for the last 3 months, whenever I try to post to the blog I am directed to a "Set Blog Name" page that doesn't work. Their Morning Open Thread this morning showed only 13 comments after 2 hours. Looks like most would-be posters are blocked. The webmaster doesn't reply to repeated emails, and the DNC "chairman's office" phone agents claim not to know anything about it. Anyone here have any insight?

    Monday Night Open Thread | 179 comments (179 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment