Today's Election-in-Process Talking Points

About Barack Obama:

1. If he gets above 50.1 percent it will be the highest dem pct since LBJ.
2. If he gets 54% it will be the highest pct for any non-incumbent candidate of either party since 1952.
3. If he simply comes in first, with any total, it will be four pop vote wins for dems in the past five cycles.
4. He should amass more votes than any other candidate ever, including reagan's 1984 standard.
5. He will be the winning candidate with the highest share of his votes coming from non-whites... and probably the candidate with the highest non-white share of all time.
6. By this evening 3/4 of American Jews will have voted for a guy whose middle name is Hussein: if we cannot use this lever for good in the Middle East, we do not deserve to be a superpower.

About John McCain:

1. We simply do not know what kind of president John McCain would make--it could be good, it could be very bad.
2. We do know what kind of president Sarah Palin would make--and we all should be eager to keep her as far away from the presidential line of succession as possible.
3. Yes, John McCain ran a dirty campaign. But it was a less dirty campaign than any Republican has run since... well, since the memory of man runneth (with the possible exception of Ford 1976). The difference this year was that--for some reason--this year a fraction of the mainstream press called them on it rather than ignoring it entirely.
4. The Republican candidates this year were all one or more of: (i) ideologically-blinded, (ii) incompetent, or (iii) risk-loving for its own sake and hence erratic. John McCain was (iii)--which makes him the best of the Republicans on offer this year.

Comments

[Leila Abu-Saba]

"By this evening 3/4 of American Jews will have voted for a guy whose middle name is Hussein: if we cannot use this lever for good in the Middle East, we do not deserve to be a superpower."

That made me laugh out loud. Thank you.

[anne]

http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2008/11/can-arab-media-cool-it-bit-commentaries.html

November 4, 2008

Can the Arab media cool it a bit? The commentaries and analysis are going bizarre and crazy. Many are saying that this will bring an end to racism, and that a new era will start. Did you see the article * by Abdul-Bari Atwan in Al-Quds Al-Arabi? He was most festive and celebratory and said that it will be good for the Islamic Ummah. ** What planet do those people inhabit? Every single person who advises Obama on the Middle East is horrible. Every one.

* http://www.alquds.co.uk/index.asp?fname=yesterday%5C02z51.htm&storytitle=%C5%E4%CA%DD%C7%D6%C9%20%C7%E6%C8%C7%E3%C7%20%C7%E1%CA%C7%D1%ED%CE%ED%C9%20&storytitleb=%DA%C8%CF%20%C7%E1%C8%C7%D1%ED%20%DA%D8%E6%C7%E4&storytitlec=

** Community

-- As'ad AbuKhalil

[howard]

sorry, prof, we do know what kind of president john mccain would make, and it would be very bad: no one as impulsive as he is can possibly make a success of the executive office over a 4-year span.

what happened to the days when the reaganites used to say "don't just do something, stand there!" too bad it didn't penetrate for mccain.

[Richard Cownie]

"Yes, John McCain ran a dirty campaign. But it was a less dirty campaign than any Republican has run since... well, since the memory of man runneth (with the possible exception of Ford 1976)."

Really ? I thought Dole 96 was pretty clean compared to any of the subsequent
campaigns run by Rove or his acolytes. McCain didn't peddle the worst of the
slime himself (neither did W, of course), but he has to take the blame for everything
on Palin's teleprompter as well.

And if "clean" just means that the independent-expenditure slime merchants didn't
do much, that's only because they lost their shirts in the Wall St crash and didn't
have money to burn, not because of any forebearance by Saint McCain.

[Richard Cownie]

"We simply do not know what kind of president John McCain would make--it could be good, it could be very bad."

That's over-generous. We know this much:

1) His presidential campaign has been a mess, with no consistent message, poor
fundraising, and poor organization.

2) His decision-making style as shown by the VP pick is ill-informed gambling.

3) He has no clear goals. One week he's going to balance the budget, the next
he isn't. He's going to slash earmarks (except the ones he likes, such as
aid to Israel and military housing). He's going to freeze spending (except
the military, and other stuff he likes).

4) His economic policy, as far as it's articulated at all, would be disastrously
neo-Hooverite, focused on cutting government spending during a recession.

5) He's focused on trivia at the expense of the big picture (earmarks, winning the
news cycle).

6) His foreign policy is insane (throwing Russia out of the G8).

7) His inner circle is full of lobbyists - some even lobbyists for foreign
governments.

8) On the big issue of climate change, he has a terrible voting record. And
he doesn't seem to understand his own policy proposals (claims to be proposing
cap-and-trade, but wants the cap to raise if the price gets high. But raising
the price is the whole damn point of cap-and-trade !!)

9) His intervention in the bailout showed that he can't (or won't) get the support
of even half his own party on necessary but unpopular legislation. So it's
clear that as president he wouldn't actually get much of his agenda enacted.

I think that's a long enough list to be sure at the 95% confidence level that McCain
would be a very bad president indeed. At best he would be ineffectual; at worst he
would get us into more and bigger unnecessary wars *and* turn the recession into a
long-lasting depression.

On the plus side, he's got some fairly reasonable ideas about immigration and trade.
But on the big issues - the economy, foreign policy, and climate change - he's
terrible.

[Richard Cownie]

I forgot to mention McCain's appalling healthcare reform proposals, which would gut the employer-provided health insurance market, without setting up any viable alternative.
(And might also, depending on which of his advisers was talking to whom, involve drastic cuts to Medicare and Medicaid).

Just bloody awful.

[anne]

"We simply do not know what kind of president John McCain would make...."

This, coming after only 347 "dishonorables?"

[anne]

"We do know what kind of president Sarah Palin would make...."

This, coming as justification for a merciless, ceaseless battering of a woman.

[Measure for Measure]

"...battering of a woman." Metaphorically, of course. Dan Quayle received comparable, possible greater, contempt.

Where did Romney the chameleon fit in - is he i, ii or iii? I'm guessing (i), but that it was wholly insincere and therefore a noisy guide to behavior post-Jan 2009. At least he was smart.

[S]

She battered only her own reputation. Palin's reputation lies submerged in the sewer, unrecoverable.

[S]

Certainly there are better female candidates, better female republican candidates, than Sarah Palin. But we were not offered those candidates.

Instead we were offered one of the poorest quality, laughably uninformed, demonstrably incapable executives ever to reach the national stage.

Dan Quayle is a towering statesman next to Palin.

[Wendy]

WTF is Anne on about? Palin signed up for what she got from the press, what with the clothes; the trooper firing; the per diem activity; the husband in the office stuff; the pregnant teen; the failure to release health records; the lies, lies and more lies. Her gender was largely, if not entirely, irrelevant. And that's some loaded language, too . . . "battered". Sheesh.

[anne]

What is infuriating is that the reason for the salacious, prurient concern with learning Sarah Palin's health status, which has been appropriately learned, was to be able, for an altogether new sort of political critic, to check on any prior pregnancy. Imagine even being able to write this, in retrospect, but this was an entirely new approach to prospective political bashing, an approach remarkably capturing selected self-styled progressives.

Purient inquiry about a woman is not politics, rather this is showing an impossible disdain for women and is an attempt to destroy a woman as a woman that should be unthinkable but came to be taken for granted by those who would surely immediately claim to care for the well-being of women while setting about a woman's undoing.

[anne]

"The pregnant teen...."

There we have the matter, definitively set. Thank you for explaining so wonderfully.

[Barkley Rosser]

anne,

Regarding Palin, you gutted your credibility long ago. Some of the critiques of her have been sexist, but the overwhelming majority have had nothing to do with her gender, and they have put her exactly where she deserves to be. Have you not noticed that she is overwhelmingly opposed by women, and that it is mostly men who support her? Or are you one of those people so deranged by anger at Obama for beating Hillary that you cannot see past the nose on your face?

Regarding As'ad's comment about Obama's advisers, this is one more sign that As'ad has his head located somewhere near his As'ad. Dennis Ross is "horrible"? Really?

[S]

Even if someone cares about the pregnant daughter (which I do not), I think the issue is generally one of hypocrisy, rank hypocrisy, and not one of moralizing or judging. I think Anne is smart enough to know this, but wishes to view such comments through the lens of sexism regardless.

Sarah palin proved herself to be a mean-spirited, slyly partisan policy dunce, but one who is still inexperienced enough to be oafish and tone-deaf on some issues (stupid things like the clothing, or the 'real America' comments, or the... ability to speak in complete sentences.)

Let Sarah Palin's career be destroyed. This would be merciful now for her and for the nation. Her brand of politics is hopefully dying, and it was shameful of the Republican party to attempt to use her. I don't call her a complete villain or a complete victim. Just a silly person who enthusiastically jumped into a pool that was altogether too deep for her.

[Joe S.]

"The Republican candidates this year were all one or more of: (i) ideologically-blinded, (ii) incompetent, or (iii) risk-loving for its own sake and hence erratic. John McCain was (iii)--which makes him the best of the Republicans on offer this year."

Measure for Measure suggested that Romney didn't fall into any of Brad's categories. The same is true for Huckabee, unless you view his religion as ideology. Romney would have been a better president than McCain. So might have Huckabee, who is woefully ignorant but a very fast learner. Heck, even Giuliani (who would make a terrible president) doesn't fall into one of Brad's three categories, unless you consider his craziness a form of incompetence.

The problem with Republican candidates for president is that, even if they are qualified (as Jeb Bush or Bobby Jindal are, by any measure,) they will be forced to dance with the ones that brung them. That's what brought McCain down. And, Republican voters and funders being the ugly sorts that they are, that dance disqualifies any of them.

[Chuleton]

Having worked local politics in a heavily Republican southern county, I'd like to point out that women like Sarah Palin are a dime a dozen. And men like Joe the Plumber are a dime a gross. It's absolutely amazing to me that anyone sees anything special in Sarah Palin-- all she is is another Republiclone who happened to be it the right place at the right time, and with the right looks. The only reason she has any appeal at all is because, for all their bluster, right wingers are experiencing self doubt (not that they'd ever acknowledge it) and need validation. Palin was plucked from obscurity almost as arbitrarily as Joe the Plumber, and for precisely the same reasons.

[S]

Sarah Palin is exactly the type of narcissistic, screwed up identity politics of anger/resentment that I hope is going away in this country.

Not that there isn't MASSIVE identity politics wrapped up in the Obama ticket, but on the other hand, there is a large population of people who are voting for someone who doesn't look or have a name at all like them. That's something small to celebrate, I suppose.

Maybe it's my bias, but I find the shockingly ignorant, resentful type of vile know-nothing, identity politics to be the most disturbing sort, and that is Palinism.

[anne]

Barkley Rosser:

"Regarding As'ad's comment about Obama's advisers, this is one more sign that As'ad has his head located somewhere near his As'ad. Dennis Ross is 'horrible?' Really?"

Notice the horrid language, which obviously reflects the thinking. Interesting the disdain for As'ad AbuKhalil, who is deserving of respect. I too find Obama advisers on foreign policy horrible, however, so please continue to insult me as is your wont.

[S]

Clear this up for us, Anne. Palin's um... how do McCain and Palin's advisers on National Security stack up in comparison? More, or less repulsive to you?

Or is this not really about that?

[christofay]

McCain's foreign policy as is Lieberman's as is all of the Republicans' is cloud kookoo land.

Obama first staked a claim for rationality by opposing Cheney's war for Iraqi oil. On the other hand Sen Clinton voted for that cruel bowl of cloud kookoo land the Kyl-Lieberman act. What would you say to the head of the sixteen year Iranian girl bowling down the street after our first strategical bombing strike in our efforts to secure Iranian oil fields for the oil majors?

As far as Obama's foreign policy is bring 'em home (while we can still pay the freight costs), I say his foreign policy is an act of genius.

[stewart]

For some thoughts on personality and presidential style, go to the Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics; http://www.csbsju.edu/uspp/
They take this seriously, and leave their old descriptions up, so they can be taken to task if need be. Personality ('Character' in Republican-speak) matters, and the personality to get elected doesn't map well on the personality to be a good president.
Their takes, on 3 people of interest to the readers here:
Obama: Confident & conciliatory (we could use some of that around here)
McCain: Risk-taking adventurer
Hilary Clinton: Ambitious, dominant, conscientious

As an aside on Palin - she could be worse, she's got the Reagan trick of saying 'I'd like to do something REALLY conservative, but my hands are tied by...'. However, it disturbs me that the biggest cause of her governorship has been trying to ruin her ex-brother-in-law by any means possible. The personal really is political for her.

[Barkley Rosser]

anne,

You are disappointing. You suggest that I am using "horrid language." You quoted this worthless govnoi scheisskopf zib al'khazil As'ad who says that all of Obama's advisers are "horrible." You are a hypocrite. Answer the question, please: is Dennis Ross "horrible"? No, I do not think so. You are endlessly bombarding lists with garbage. Sorry, I have no respect for him. You need to learn more about these matters.

Horrid and horrible, duh, gag. Your guy is both. Find somebody more knowledgeable and less twisted to quote so endlessly.

[anne]

Barkley Rosser:

"You quoted this worthless govnoi scheisskopf zib al'khazil As'ad...."

Wow, wow, wow; "worthless govnoi scheisskopf zib al'khazil As'ad."

[ThresherK]

"But it was a less dirty campaign than any Republican has run since"

Whoo--way to set the bar :-).

"The difference this year was that--for some reason--this year a fraction of the mainstream press called them on it rather than ignoring it entirely."

Those DFHs on the Intertubes. And cable TV: I, for one, saw any number of times where Colbert/Stewart and Maddow/Olbermann were converging.

The right wing discourse got so out of whack that satirizing it and reporting it were the exact same thing.

[Barkley Rosser]

anne,

Oh, that should have been "zib al khazir." Sorry about my Arabic getting rusty. However, with the election outcome, all is forgiven. You and As'ad are wonderful, and who knows, maybe Dennis Ross is horrible, but in my current mood I think everybody is wonderful, even Sarah Palin (eeeeeeeeek! residual sexism strikes again!!!!!!!), :-).