February 5, 2008

Drum roll please

Well, it's here at last. Fat Tuesday..... party time!!! Oh, and Super-duper pooper-scooper Tuesday or whatever you want to call it.

It's doubtful anything major will break out in the Clinton - Obama contest today, but who knows? We won't be able to know the final delegate count from today's results for some time anyway. It will be interesting to watch California, which has been described by no less than James Carville himself as do or die for Hillary, and polling has Obama drawing even with her there.

It's a chance for Capt. Queeg to break away from Wink Martindale, who's bedeviled by the fact that Mike "What the huck?" Huckabee refuses to bow out and is mortally wounding Wink by taking votes which otherwise would have gone to him, thus providing Capt. Queeg with just enough margin to win.

The right wing loons are frothing with hatred for McCain, (well, they're paid millions to froth with hate, tell Republicans that it's OK to express their inner hate, and as a matter of fact, if they don't, they're not "real" Republicans. McCain is just their target du jour.)

I haven't mentioned this phenomena previously due to the rule that when the enemy is busy hanging themselves, you should just get out of the way. But it's with considerable glee that I watch a guy like McCain being flayed for being "too liberal". Wow. These die-hards still think the country is actually THAT conservative. (It never really was. Least of all the perverted brand of conservatism they represent.)

It's clear the Republican party, as it stands after the barbarians stormed the gates, is so full of truly and deeply disturbed people at the top willing to blatantly lie and misstate facts and deny reality, with so much greed and selfishness driven ideology, abject fear, anger, and mistrust that it would only take a pin-prick (or in this case I guess, a prick) to make the party explode Hindenburg-like and crash to the ground.

Only this time no one will be moved to utter, "Oh the humanity!" because there's so little there.

With Obama shining a bright light onto the true possibilities in this country if we discard all the mental rot and festering right-wing psychology that appeals to the very worst of human nature, the fanatic right wing loons are in panic at the prospect of being exposed the relentlessly negative frauds and shills they are and relegated to the trash heap of history where they belong.

Obama and to a lesser extent Clinton's messages stand in stark relief to the truly ugly and terribly ignorant nature of fundamentalist intolerance and rock-headed righteousness, the mindless machismo of the "kill 'em all" armchair warriors and those making billions off war and instability, and corporate shills bent on destroying government entirely, fixing the rules to allow corporate control of all aspects of government while leaving the vast majority of Americans struggling and fighting over the remaining scraps of the vanishing American dream. All of that could be gone tomorrow and the country would vastly improve.

And make no mistake, that's exactly what the corporate and right wing elite set out to do, get poor and middle class Americans fighting amongst themselves while they were busy looting the treasury and reaping billions. (Anyone who's worked in a shop will instantly recognize this tactic) And that's exactly what they did with great success. With Fox News providing the blatant misinformation and party propaganda and all the violence and cheesy sex to distract the rubes, they were busily raking in millions with both hands through no-bid contracts and shady dealings on Wall Street.

The Dem candidates are offering a different vision of America, and an end to the Republican scheme which has drug the nation down to new depths, plundered the economy, and abused our very government and constitution to cynically enrich the very wealthy and connected at the great expense of the poor and middle class, and to attempt to cement a grip on power with little or no accountibility to the public whatsoever.

And the right sees the writing on the wall. It's on the verge of a mental meltdown at the prospect of being exposed. At long last people are waking up. At long last, the emperor truly has no clothes.

Sit back and enjoy the show as the radical right takes a swan dive into overdue obscurity.

Not a whole lot of excitement on the local scene. Jacobs will ride to re-election on top of his bank account. It should be a lock. The only interesting thing about the race is to see how well Rumler does this time around and to see what sort of margin Jacobs gets for all the corporate PAC cash taken in and spent.

The Lack-Boland contest should be a little tighter, though I'll go out on a limb and say it's likely Boland will once again squeak by on the strength of the northern part of the district. But who knows?

So here's a thread for you to share your predictions and/or analyze the results.

Give your impressions of how the local campaigns were run (blessedly little negative campaigning... wonder why?) or on the national campaigns so far. Document the atrocities, highlights, lowlights, and/or your experience at the polls.

Here's a place to say what you think about this Tuesday February 5th election extravaganza.


At 2/05/2008 10:14 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Rumler were to win he would be into the three unions who gave him 90% of his Money would be bought and payed for.

At 2/05/2008 12:17 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Thanks for that anon 10:14.

Not sure exactly what you're trying to say, but I'll take a stab at it and say you're suggesting that Rumler would be bought and "payed" for by the unions?

Well, we can't have a Democratic senator who supports unions, can we? That would be just HORRIBLE.

Better we have one that pisses off the unions and supports Republican issues such as phony "lawsuit reform" and is beholden to big insurance, big healthcare, gambling interests, and big pharmaceutical corporations.

You're so right.

No Dem in their right mind would choose a guy who supports unions.

At 2/05/2008 2:55 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hopefully the voters will recognize its time for a change.

Its time to get the big business out of here and washington.

Long overdue.

At 2/05/2008 6:18 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

People calling into a radio show I caught this afternoon were saying, one after another, how emotional and uplifting their voting was to them.

The ability to vote for the first woman candidate for president to make it this far, the chance to vote for an African-American.

And most of all, the exhileration, and sober and powerful realization that their vote may very well represent the beginning of the end of this long period of darkness for the country.

At 2/06/2008 12:24 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

A few observations from the night...

Obama giving a typically stirring speech in Chicago late night and directly lifting a line that I heard Clinton use only a day or two ago, "We are the change we've been waiting for."

Clinton takes California, thus avoiding that potential major loss.

Obama remarkably winning several western and decidedly blue states.

A very bad night for Ted Kennedy with Obama losing MA, and CA, where Kennedy had spent a large amount of time campaigning for Obama.

Huckabee, favored in only his home state of Arkansas, picks up three more.

Perhaps the most serious fall-out is Romney effectively being knocked out of the race both by McCain's strong showing and Huckabee's better than expected showing, which the Romney campaign will no doubt argue took away enough votes to keep Romney from competing with or beating McCain.

Despite Willard's forceful promise to supporters during his end of the night speech that he's not going anywhere, his campaign is reported to be planning to have some "frank discussions" about whether they'll continue.

At 2/06/2008 7:09 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

It appears as though the Republicans will have a lot of time to rally behind their nominee - McCain.

The Dem's will have a knock-down drag-out battle for some time to come and November may very well be decided on how well fenses are mended...will Obama's youth vote show up in November for Hillary (which they historically never have), and will the black vote turn out for Hillary after the games the Clintons have played with race.


At 2/06/2008 10:07 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Anon 7:08.

Don't start rubbing your thighs just yet. The factor you allude to may be offset by the enormous fund-raising advantage enjoyed by the Dems.

But obviously, Dem party leaders are very interested in the primary not going on until the convention.

At 2/06/2008 7:11 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The fundraising issue presents concerns - as Hillary, if she is the nominee, has used up a lot of her General Election funds (a lot of her donors have max-ed out already - where Obama's have not).

In addition, it is very possible that the Republicans have held off the big dollars until the General Election.

At 2/06/2008 8:16 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Anon 7:11

That's an important consideration and one that I've heard mentioned occasionally.

My thoughts are that though Obama's smaller donors haven't maxed out yet, one certainly can't assume that they can be counted on to give more money.

I'm thinking of folks that are first time donors or that rarely donate, and for them, if they've already given, say, $100 or so, that might be "maxed out" as far as their budget for such things go and they won't be likely to kick in again.

Now if there's some crisis for the Obama campaign, such as it's neck and neck somewhere and the outcome hinges on raising funds, then yes, he could probably raise an amazing amount of money from these small donors.

On the Clinton side, it is a factor indeed, as a maxed out donor stays maxed out. This means she'd have to somehow tap into a new reserve of donors or manage to get far more from all of her smaller donors.

As to the Republicans holding back on their cash until the general.... I'm not so sure. That suggestion seems a bit far fetched in my opinion.

First of all, there's the fact that for the first time, Dems are attracting far more cash at every level, from congressional races to presidential.

This isn't because of Republicans sitting on their wallets as much as it's due to the usual big corporate and other interests being practical and betting on the odds on favorite, namely that the Dems are going to be in control of congress and the White House in short order.

It may happen that the usual gang of right wing billionaires might supply a large cash infusion as the race shapes up, particularly if Hillary is the nominee and appears to be pulling away from Capt. Queeg, but I'm not sure it will be enough to be of consequence.

Bottom line is that the money is flowing to the Dems, partly due to ideological support and the craving for change, but also largely due to pure practicality and trying to get in early to buy access. (With Hillary, not so much Obama who remains PAC free.)

It's too early to really make any predictions, but I'm hoping that the Dem nominee is Obama as I feel he'd stand a much stronger chance against Capt. Queeg. Just imagine the contrast of those two standing on the same stage and you get the picture. One, an elderly cramped, bitter, grumpy war hawk who seems perpetually about to explode beneath the menacing veneer of a soft voice, and the other a tall, athletic and young, briliant and inspirational African-American with a vision for a new kind of politics whose very physical pressence suggests a new era.

I like the Dems odds in that case.

McCain/Clinton? Not so good.

At 2/07/2008 7:13 AM, Anonymous Josh Curren said...

Speaking of money...Hillary just loaned her campaign $5,000,000, as money is so tight!

$5,000,000 - CASH!
Wow, politics really pays well.

At 2/07/2008 1:07 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Once again "Josh", your eagerness to take a swipe at Dems seems to prevent you from thinking more than a second before speaking.

Obviously, neither of the Clintons made much money from politics.

They were worth much, MUCH less than nearly every Republican candidate this year and have never had much net worth. The house they got after his two terms I think was the first house they'd owned.

But if you had stopped to think, you'd recall that each of them wrote best-selling books that sold multiple millions of copies. They may have made a little money on that, ya think?

Perhaps that's evil too?

Or are the millions of people who were eager to read the Clinton's books and snapped them up the evil ones? So much evil it's hard to sort out.

At 2/07/2008 3:28 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dope, please.

Thank you for your lesson on economics, but I have a feeling that I understand far more than you'll ever know about finances/ economics - living in your la-la land of academia.

Yes, I appreciate the fact that they have both written books. Had it not been for politics - those books would not have sold.

Bill Clinton gives million-dollar speeches - if not for politics, no one would pay him to speak.

I was not being critical of the Clintons, just stating that $5,000,000 cash is a lot of money. LIQUID $5,000,000 is a LOT of money, I don't care who you are.

In fact, to have $5,000,000 liquid, one would either be an idiot (not to have it invested in real estate, businesses, or somewhat less liquid investments), or worth maybe $30,000,000+/-.

Amazing wealth building!

At 2/07/2008 10:37 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Well, your latest rather pathetic attempt to take a swipe at the Clintons is rendered moot anyway by the fact that the Clinton campaign raised the $5 million and more within 24 hours and Hillary's loan to her campaign has been easily repaid in full.

Hope that makes everything fine with your enormous grasp of economic issues.

I find the fact that you'd suggest you're an economics wizz by virtue of pointing out the obvious, that if the Clinton's hadn't been the most widely recognized and admired politicians and leaders on the planet that their books might not have sold as well, to be a stretch, even for you.

Seriously, you don't think that goes without saying? I think a hearty "DUH!" is in order.

You think it takes a superior grasp of economics to realize THAT?? Yeesh!

That's like saying the Beatles wouldn't have sold many records if it hadn't been for their incredible talent and popularity. Or maybe pointing out that water is wet.

The books, by the way, were largely about their upbringing and life stories and not centered on politics.

That said, it would be impossible, for two of the best known politicians in a generation to write autobiographies without mentioning politics at all.

(Does that observation prove that I have a great deal of expertise in economics too?)


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home