BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Riginslinger
Date: 07 Oct 08 - 04:21 PM

"Here is an article that explains a lot about us 'real' Americans."


               And it didn't even mention affirmative action!

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Oct 08 - 08:05 PM

Bruce, you don't seem to grasp that Democrats and those who resonate to their causes, in other words, non-Republicans, have no trouble understanding and accepting that there are criminals out there. Don't you understand that it is a pertinent fact that Hsu is a *criminal*? That he may be a Democrat is *not* the point.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 08 Oct 08 - 10:07 AM

"... Senator John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin have been running one of the most appalling campaigns we can remember.

They have gone far beyond the usual fare of quotes taken out of context and distortions of an opponent's record — into the dark territory of race-baiting and xenophobia. Senator Barack Obama has taken some cheap shots at Mr. McCain, but there is no comparison.

Despite the occasional slip (referring to Mr. Obama's "cronies" and calling him "that one"), Mr. McCain tried to take a higher road in Tuesday night's presidential debate. It was hard to keep track of the number of time he referred to his audience as "my friends." But apart from promising to buy up troubled mortgages as president, he offered no real answers for how he plans to solve the country's deep economic crisis. He is unable or unwilling to admit that the Republican assault on regulation was to blame.

Ninety minutes of forced cordiality did not erase the dismal ugliness of his campaign in recent weeks, nor did it leave us with much hope that he would not just return to the same dismal ugliness on Wednesday.

Ms. Palin, in particular, revels in the attack. Her campaign rallies have become spectacles of anger and insult. "This is not a man who sees America as you see it and how I see America," Ms. Palin has taken to saying.

That line follows passages in Ms. Palin's new stump speech in which she twists Mr. Obama's ill-advised but fleeting and long-past association with William Ayers, founder of the Weather Underground and confessed bomber. By the time she's done, she implies that Mr. Obama is right now a close friend of Mr. Ayers — and sympathetic to the violent overthrow of the government. The Democrat, she says, "sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country."

Her demagoguery has elicited some frightening, intolerable responses. A recent Washington Post report said at a rally in Florida this week a man yelled "kill him!" as Ms. Palin delivered that line and others shouted epithets at an African-American member of a TV crew.

Mr. McCain's aides haven't even tried to hide their cynical tactics, saying they were "going negative" in hopes of shifting attention away from the financial crisis — and by implication Mr. McCain's stumbling response.

We certainly expected better from Mr. McCain, who once showed withering contempt for win-at-any-cost politics. He was driven out of the 2000 Republican primaries by this sort of smear, orchestrated by some of the same people who are now running his campaign
..." (NYT)

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 08 Oct 08 - 10:48 AM

Released: October 08, 2008
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby Poll:
Obama 47%, McCain 45%

The telephone tracking poll shows neither candidate with a clear advantage in the national horserace

UTICA, New York - The race for President of the United States remains far too close to call between Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain as both candidates head toward the finish line, a recent Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby daily tracking telephone polls shows.


Data from this poll is available here


The survey, including a three-day sample of 1,220 likely voters collected over the previous three days - approximately 400 per day from Oct. 5-7, 2008 - shows that Obama holds a slight advantage amounting to 1.9 percentage points over McCain. This represents a bit of a recovery by McCain, who had been sliding in some polls before his running mate, Sarah Palin, put in a strong performance in her one and only debate performance last Thursday.

Three Day Tracking Poll
10-7
10-6

Obama
47.1%
47.7%

McCain
45.2%
45.3%

Others/Not sure
7.7%
7.0%


The Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll, was conducted before Tuesday's Obama-McCain debate. It was performed by live telephone operators in Zogby's in-house call center in Upstate New York, included a total of 1,220 likely voters nationwide, and carries a margin of error of +/- 2.8 percentage points.

Candidates Doing Well Among Their Own Party Members

The two candidates are doing well at attracting support from their own partisans - Obama is winning 84% of the Democratic Party support and McCain is winning 85% of the Republican Party support - but Obama has the edge among independent voters. He leads McCain among independents, 48 to 39%.

Obama wins support from a slightly higher percentage of conservative voters than McCain is winning from liberal voters, but the advantage is small.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 08 Oct 08 - 11:31 AM

Today's aggregate polls, au contraire:

RCP Average 10/01 - 10/07 -- 49.1 44.4 Obama +4.7
Rasmussen Tracking 10/05 - 10/07 3000 LV 51 45 Obama +6
Reuters/CSpan/Zogby Tracking 10/05 - 10/07 1220 LV 47 45 Obama +2
Hotline/FD Tracking 10/05 - 10/07 904 LV 45 44 Obama +1
GW/Battleground Tracking 10/02 - 10/07 800 LV 49 45 Obama +4
Gallup Tracking 10/04 - 10/06 2747 RV 51 42 Obama +9
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 10/04 - 10/05 658 RV 49 43 Obama +6
CBS News 10/03 - 10/05 616 LV 48 45 Obama +3
CNN 10/03 - 10/05 694 LV 53 45 Obama +8
Democracy Corps (D) 10/01 - 10/05 1000 LV 49 46 Obama +3

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 08 Oct 08 - 11:38 AM

Amos,

Without listing the margin of error, the numbers are not meaningful. - feel free to cherrypick ones you like, but GIVE THE MARGINS OF ERROR!!!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Oct 08 - 12:03 PM

"forced cordiality" - that's the phrase I was looking for. If you saw a character in a film acting like McCain did in that debate, you'd know he was meant to be a phony and not to be trusted.

I was reminded of the old joke about the actor saying the mist important thing in acting was sincerity - if you could do sincerity you could do anything. And it struck me that McCain couldn't do sincerity. That's not necessarily to say he'd not sincere, just that his attempts to out that across didn't ring true, a matter of technique.

But then maybe that's not how it came across to Americans. After all, it seemed to have been generally agreed, even by his opponents, that Bush was the kind of bloke people would be glad to have a beer with or have at a barbecue. I never could understand that - he'd a perfect example of the kind of bloke who'd make me wish I'd stayed home.

And why doesn't McCain do something about that bizarre comb-over hairstyle that seems designed to make people focus on his baldness. Reminds me of "The Baldy Man".

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Riginslinger
Date: 08 Oct 08 - 10:09 PM

Nothing these buffoons do or say ring true to most American voters. It's a charade we go through every four years, the purpose of which seems to have been forgotten.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 09 Oct 08 - 07:47 AM

"The (Obama) national headquarters in Chicago airily dismisses complaints from journalists wondering why a schedule cannot be printed up or at least e-mailed in time to make coverage plans. Nor is there much sympathy for those of us who report for a newscast that airs in the early evening hours. Our shows place a premium on live reporting from the scene of campaign events. But this campaign can often be found in the air and flying around at the time the "CBS Evening News with Katie Couric" is broadcast. I suspect there is a feeling within the Obama campaign that the broadcast networks are less influential in the age of the internet and thus needn't be accomodated as in the days of yore. Even if it's true, they are only hurting themselves by dissing audiences that run in the tens of millions every night.

The McCain folks are more helpful and generally friendly. The schedules are printed on actual books you can hold in your hand, read, and then plan accordingly. The press aides are more knowledgeable and useful to us in the news media. The events are designed with a better eye, and for the simple needs of the press corps. When he is available, John McCain is friendly and loquacious. Obama holds news conferences, but seldom banters with the reporters who've been following him for thousands of miles around the country. Go figure.

The McCain campaign plane is better than Obama's, which is cramped, uncomfortable and smells terrible most of the time. Somehow the McCain folks manage to keep their charter clean, even where the press is seated.

The other day in Albuquerque, N.M., the reporters were given almost no time to file their reports after McCain spoke. It was an important, aggressive speech, lambasting Obama's past associations. When we asked for more time to write up his remarks and prepare our reports, the campaign readily agreed to it. They understood.

Similar requests are often denied or ignored by the Obama campaign aides, apparently terrified that the candidate may have to wait 20 minutes to allow reporters to chronicle what he's just said. It's made all the more maddening when we are rushed to our buses only to sit and wait for 30 minutes or more because nobody seems to know when Obama is actually on the move.

Maybe none of this means much. Maybe a front-running campaign like Obama's that is focused solely on victory doesn't have the time to do the mundane things like print up schedules or attend to the needs of reporters.

But in politics, everything that goes around comes around."

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/07/politics/fromtheroad/entry4507703.shtml

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 09 Oct 08 - 07:55 AM

Pollster: Don't believe the Dem hype

By Joe Dwinell & Jessica Fargen
Wednesday, October 8, 2008 - Updated 23h ago

The presidential race is still too close to call and could come down to the very last weekend before voters decide if they like or distrust Barack Obama, a national pollster predicts.

"I don't think Obama has closed the deal yet," pollster John Zogby told the Herald yesterday.

Zogby's latest poll, released yesterday in conjunction with C-Span and Reuters, shows Obama and John McCain in a statistical dead heat, with the Illinois Democrat up 48-45 percent.

Zogby said the race mirrors the 1980 election, when voters didn't embrace Ronald Reagan over then-President Jimmy Carter until just days before the election.

"The Sunday before the election the dam burst," Zogby said of the 1980 tilt. "That's when voters determined they were comfortable with Reagan."

Now voters are wrestling with two senators with opposite resumes - Obama, at 47, the unknown, and the established 72-year-old McCain.

Zogby said he's still hearing from moderates and non-partisan voters - what he calls "the big middle" - who are still shopping for a candidate.

"It still can break one way or the other," Zogby says.

The Numbers

The three-day survey polled 1,220 likely voters - about 400 people a day. Zogby will continuously poll right up until the November election.

The latest poll numbers may reflect the bump that McCain received after his running mate, Alaskan Gov. Sarah Palin sparred with Obama's running mate, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden during the first and only vice presidential debate last week.

The poll shows that the two White House contenders have no problem attracting support from their own parties.

Obama is winning 84 percent of the Democratic Party support and McCain has 85 percent of the GOP support, but Obama has the edge among sought-after Independent voters.

He leads McCain among independents, 48 percent to 39 percent, according to the poll.

Obama also has support from a slightly higher percent of conservative voters than McCain gets from liberal voters, but the advantage is small, according to the poll.

Pollsters surveyed 1,220 likely voters and asked approximately 39 questions. The margin of error is plus or minus 2.9 percentage points.

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/2008/view.bg?articleid=1124117&srvc=2008campaign&position=8

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 01:04 PM

A far, far better choice.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Charley Noble
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 01:21 PM

Amos-

I like the quote that "This is one candidate that is coming up from behind."

Where do I send my check?

Cheerily,
Charley Noble, who will not run if elected!

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 03:44 PM

So, you've decided to back McCain, what?

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 11 Oct 08 - 03:54 PM

Rig:

You are flying in circles with your eyes closed, my friend.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: katlaughing
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 03:23 PM

CNN's most recent poll of the commonwealth, conducted September 28-30, showed Obama with a 57-40 lead over McCain in southeast Virginia. (In the context of this poll, southeast Virginia encompasses not just Hampton Roads, but also some inland counties that may include larger populations of African-Americans.) A Mason-Dixon poll of registered voters released on October 1, suggested a statistically insignificant 47-46 lead for McCain in Hampton Roads.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: katlaughing
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 03:25 PM

Forgot to post this from the same article:

Palin was campaigning in Virginia: Unfortunately for Palin, her botched pronunciation of "Norfolk" likely won't go unnoticed by the locals.

"Very good to be here in the home of the Naval Station Nor-fork, yeah, and the Naval Air Force Station also, Oceana," she said.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 11:29 PM

Hey, now don't get your knickers in a twist..but this just came to me, via e-mail, so, like a good little sweetheart, I thought I'd post it here, to get your feedback....and for God sakes, don't shoot the messenger,...I've heard this before, but this clip is new to me...so...
whadya' think???
P.S. I already know what Amos thinks..or should I say 'Feels'...


http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/this_could_be_the_game_changer.html

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Oct 08 - 11:34 PM

From: Amos
Date: 08 Oct 08 - 10:07 AM

"... Senator John McCain and Gov. Sarah Palin have been running one of the most appalling campaigns we can remember.

"we"????....like....

Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
I'm a schizophrenic,
And so am I

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 12:52 AM

Clean up in Aisle Five!

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 01:06 AM

Thank you, Kat...I've heard that there was that posting on the net..I guess, according to the man in the other video, that the certificate posted was a fraud. However, I myself, have made no determination, at all. Apparently, this thing is suppose to go to court....Am curiously watching. Thank you, again, for not 'shooting the messenger'....
Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 01:14 PM

"October 14, 2008
Bulls, Bears, Donkeys and Elephants

By TOMMY McCALL
Since 1929, Republicans and Democrats have each controlled the presidency for nearly 40 years. So which party has been better for American pocketbooks and capitalism as a whole? Well, here's an experiment: imagine that during these years you had to invest exclusively under either Democratic or Republican administrations. How would you have fared?
As of Friday, a $10,000 investment in the S.& P. stock market index* would have grown to $11,733 if invested under Republican presidents only, although that would be $51,211 if we exclude Herbert Hoover's presidency during the Great Depression. Invested under Democratic presidents only, $10,000 would have grown to $300,671 at a compound rate of 8.9 percent over nearly 40 years."

Chart can be found here.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 01:17 PM

What a crock, Guest-from-Paranoia.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 01:18 PM

To the Editor:

Re "Fire the Campaign" (column, Oct. 13):

William Kristol argues that John McCain should stop "unveiling gimmicky proposals," "tell the truth," show the "kind of sound judgment and strong leadership," the readiness to be commander in chief "he's shown in his career."

But the problem with Mr. Kristol's advice is that Mr. McCain's campaign is the very reflection of who he is and who he has been for the last 26 years. Unpredictability and going your own way are the essence of "maverick-hood."

Finally, if Mr. McCain isn't able to control his campaign or its message, as Mr. Kristol implies, what kind of commander in chief does that portend?

Bonita Rothman

Staten Island, Oct. 13, 2008

•

To the Editor:

William Kristol is right on the money in advising John McCain to fire his inept campaign, saying "McCain needs to make his case, and do so as a serious but cheerful candidate for times that need a serious but upbeat leader."

At the same time, however, it is critical for Mr. McCain to point out that this election is not about George W. Bush and the past eight years of mistakes, but rather about which candidate the voter trusts to lead the country over the next four years.

Does the country want to elect a man who has shown a total lack of leadership qualities as evidenced by his 130 "present" votes on controversial issues as an Illinois state senator, or does the country require an experienced hand at the helm to solve the domestic and foreign policy challenges to get the nation back on track?

That is the case John McCain must make Wednesday night, or he is toast.

Paul Schoenbaum

Williamsburg, Va., Oct. 13, 2008

•

To the Editor:

One of the main reasons a candidate campaigns for election is to show the people how he or she will govern. Should the McCain campaign take William Kristol's advice, the American people would ask yet again: Who is John McCain?

Is he the man who campaigned a certain way until three weeks before the election, or the man who decided to truly put his country first and behave himself as a last resort, simply because he was losing?

Also, if Mr. McCain were winning with his current campaign of ugly tactics, would Mr. Kristol call on him to fire his advisers and take on a positive, constructive tone? David C. Zweig

Los Angeles, Oct. 13, 2008

To the Editor:

Bob Herbert is right. The G.O.P.'s mask has slipped (column, Oct. 11).

All at once, our country has reached the tipping point where demographic, cultural, scientific and economic realities have "shocked and awed" our country, leaving the G.O.P. — and its "base" — behind.

My children, 26 and 28, see racism, sexism and anti-intellectualism as a kind of traditional insanity. They are alarmed by the McCain-Palin campaign's cynical willingness to fan the flames of destructive rage against a modern, thoughtful multiracial American who is likely to win the presidential election.

I think that what we are now witnessing are "the birth pangs" of a 21st-century American democracy ... and they aren't pretty. Robert Stern

Montauk, N.Y., Oct. 11, 2008

(Random letters from the NYT re McCain's campaign to date)

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Stringsinger
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 01:31 PM

The taxes have to go up to pay for the things that need to be done to reform the malpractices of the Bush Administration.

Obama has had the courage to say that he would raise taxes on the rich.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 01:41 PM

Well, sems as if John McCain has changed course yet again... All this bouncing from pillar to post ion his part can't be helping him shore up this idea that he ain't consistent... If this were a race between two sail boats, Obama's is the one with all the sails full and everyone working together and McCain's would be the one with a drigter reacher floppin' over the bow and draggin' in the water and crew running all over the place trying to figure out how to get it out...

I ain't sayin' that McCain can't win... I mean, we all lived thru the 2000 bad joke of an attempted election but...

...should he somehow pulll it off, the country will be in more serious trouble than it is with Bush...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Alice
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 02:23 PM

Just saw Palin on the news saying McCain is going to cut out all unnecessary spending and just focus on things like aid to veterans. Um, gee, he's changed direction again. Now he's going to support what he's been voting against.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Alice
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 02:36 PM

"In theory, John McCain, with his long record of service as a Navy pilot and prisoner of war story from Vietnam, should have the market cornered on the military vote.

Instead, he has drawn opposition from many veterans because of his voting record in the Senate. Sen. McCain has voted against bills that would have improved veterans' benefits, particularly health care, or measures to ease the strain on active-duty troops and their families.

The disapproval among vets for Sen. McCain has fed surprising support for Barack Obama, who has voted for many of the veterans' initiatives in the Senate that his opponent rejected."
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/opinion/content/opinion/epaper/2008/08/03/m2e_moffe

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: PoppaGator
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 02:51 PM

You tell 'em Alice!

For those who haven't seen fit to click the link, here's a pertinient excerpt from that Palm Beach Post article:

The Disabled Veterans of America gives him [McCain] a 20 percent rating, compared with an 80 percent rating for Sen. Obama. The Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans for America gives Sen. McCain a D and Sen. Obama a B+. The Vietnam Veterans of America say Sen. McCain has voted against them on 15 issues.

One of the most vocal and fastest-growing veterans groups to oppose the McCain campaign is VoteVets.org. Formed in 2006, the organization claims a membership of roughly 100,000, with a political action committee devoted to electing congressional candidates who oppose the handling of the Iraq war.

Especially galling to VoteVets.org is Sen. McCain's opposition to the new, bipartisan GI Bill that increases education benefits for Iraq and Afghanistan vets. Sen. Obama voted for the bill when it passed 75-22 in May; Sen. McCain was on the campaign trail and did not vote.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 05:44 PM

"Nutty Attacks On ACORN


In recent weeks, conservatives have escalated their attacks on ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now. Conservative lawmakers were able to remove a provision aimed at aiding low-income housing programs from the Bush administration's $700 billion economic bailout bill by calling it a "slush fund" for ACORN. Before that, conservatives blamed ACORN for "precipitating the subprime crisis." And last week, they alleged that the "purpose" of ACORN is to engage in voter fraud. However, as columnist Joel McNally correctly noted, the "underlying motive for attacking ACORN" seems to be that it is the "nation's largest grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people." "It is an organization that engages in that dreaded community organizing," McNally wrote. "It actually tries to give a voice to the poor and most vulnerable among us." Indeed, after years of enacting policies catering to the wealthy, the right-wing seems to be fearful of millions of new low-income voters registered by ACORN casting their ballots in favor of progressive policies.
 
VOTER 'FRAUD': In early October, ACORN announced that it had registered 1.3 million new voters for the November election. Seizing on reports of apparently fraudulent voter registrations in some states, conservatives began claiming that the "purpose" of ACORN is to commit "voter fraud." However, all that was found during a raid of ACORN's office in Nevada was apparently fraudulent voter registration forms, which do not constitute voter fraud. "It's not voter fraud unless someone shows up at the voting booth on election day and tries to pass himself off as 'Tony Romo.'" And who would try to do that?" wrote Rep. Jesse Jackson (D-IL). As New York University's Brennan Center for Justice noted, "[T]here are no reports that we have discovered of votes actually cast in the names of [false] registrants." Under most state laws, in fact, voter registration organizations like ACORN are required to turn in all the forms they receive, even the suspicious ones. Furthermore, as Brad Friedman pointed out in the Guardian, "[I]f [ACORN] can't authenticate the registration, or it's incomplete or questionable in other ways, they flag that form as problematic...In almost every case where you've heard about fraud by Acorn, it's because Acorn itself notified officials about the fraud that's been perpetrated on them by rogue canvassers."
 
THE ECONOMIC CRISIS: Before alleging that it was engaging in voter fraud, conservatives claimed that ACORN was responsible for the subprime crisis and the ensuing financial meltdown. Stanley Kurtz wrote in the National Review that ACORN "had a major role in precipitating the subprime crisis," and then said in the New York Post that ACORN helped "undermine the US economy by pushing the banking system into a sinkhole of bad loans." Thomas DiLorenzo claimed that ACORN forced lenders to make bad loans to low-income people "through a process that sounds like legalized extortion." However, the claim that ACORN -- or loans to low-income people in general -- caused the financial crisis by enabling lower-income families to buy homes has been debunked again and again. As Daniel Gross wrote in Newsweek, "[D]id AIG plunge into the credit-default swaps business with abandon because ACORN members picketed its offices? Please." Most economists blame the current crisis on market failure and sparse regulation, but conservatives are attempting to draw attention elsewhere by smearing the victims of predatory lending and implicating ACORN.

A LONG-RUNNING CAMPAIGN: Last Friday, conservative members of Congress "sent a letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey requesting the Department of Justice ensure that the actions of ACORN did not violate federal laws." But conservatives have gone down this road before, only to find nothing. In 2004, ACORN faced three lawsuits pertaining to alleged voter fraud, all of which were dismissed. As noted at the time, "several politically motivated law firms brought baseless charges of voter registration fraud against ACORN in an effort to inhibit its work to register low-income and minority voters." But the Bush administration was so intent on furthering these trumped-up charges of voter fraud that in 2006 attorneys from the Department of Justice -- including New Mexico's David Iglesias -- were fired for not pursuing fraud cases "to the satisfaction of their bosses." Revealing the shallowness of the conservative outrage though, the New York Times reported last week that "tens of thousands of eligible voters in at least six swing states have been removed from the rolls or have been blocked from registering in ways that appear to violate federal law." This has garnered scant attention compared to the uproar surrounding ACORN"

The Progress Report

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: katlaughing
Date: 14 Oct 08 - 07:29 PM

Nothing quite like a summing up by a Brit:

    Friday October 3 2008
      guardian.co.uk
      
      Flirting her way to victory
      Sarah Palin's farcical debate performance lowered the
      standards for both female candidates and US political
      discourse
      
      
      At least three times last night, Sarah Palin, the adorable,
      preposterous vice-presidential candidate, winked at the
      audience. Had a male candidate with a similar reputation for
      attractive vapidity made such a brazen attempt to flirt his
      way into the good graces of the voting public, it would have
      universally noted, discussed and mocked. Palin, however, has
      single-handedly so lowered the standards both for female
      candidates and American political discourse that, with her
      newfound ability to speak in more-or-less full sentences,
      she is now deemed to have performed acceptably last night.
      
      By any normal standard, including the ones applied to
      male presidential candidates of either party, she did not.
      Early on, she made the astonishing announcement that she had
      no intentions of actually answering the queries put to her.
      "I may not answer the questions that either the
      moderator or you want to hear, but I'm going to talk
      straight to the American people and let them know my track
      record also," she said.
      
      And so she preceded, with an almost surreal disregard for
      the subjects she was supposed to be discussing, to unleash
      fusillades of scripted attack lines, platitudes, lies,
      gibberish and grating references to her own pseudo-folksy
      authenticity.
      
      It was an appalling display. The only reason it was not
      widely described as such is that too many American pundits
      don't even try to judge the truth, wisdom or
      reasonableness of the political rhetoric they are paid to
      pronounce upon. Instead, they imagine themselves as
      interpreters of a mythical mass of "average
      Americans" who they both venerate and despise.
      
      In pronouncing upon a debate, they don't try and
      determine whether a candidate's responses correspond to
      existing reality, or whether he or she is capable of talking
      about subjects such as the deregulation of the financial
      markets or the devolution of the war in Afghanistan . The
      criteria are far more vaporous. In this case, it was whether
      Palin could avoid utterly humiliating herself for 90
      minutes, and whether urbane commentators would believe that
      she had connected to a public that they see as ignorant and
      sentimental. For the Alaska governor, mission accomplished.
      
      There is indeed something mesmerizing about Palin, with her
      manic beaming and fulsome confidence in her own charm. The
      force of her personality managed to slightly obscure the
      insulting emptiness of her answers last night. It's
      worth reading the transcript of the encounter, where it
      becomes clearer how bizarre much of what she said was. Here,
      for example, is how she responded to Biden's comments
      about how the middle class has been short-changed during
      the Bush administration, and how McCain will continue
      Bush's policies:
      
      Say it ain't so, Joe, there you go again pointing
      backwards again. You preferenced [sic] your whole comment
      with the Bush administration. Now doggone it, let's look
      ahead and tell Americans what we have to plan to do for them
      in the future. You mentioned education, and I'm glad you
      did. I know education you are passionate about with your
      wife being a teacher for 30 years, and god bless her. Her
      reward is in heaven, right? ... My brother, who I think is
      the best schoolteacher in the year, and here's a
      shout-out to all those third graders at Gladys Wood
      Elementary School , you get extra credit for watching the
      debate.
      
      Evidently, Palin's pre-debate handlers judged her
      incapable of speaking on a fairly wide range of subjects,
      and so instructed to her to simply disregard questions that
      did not invite memorized talking points or cutesy
      filibustering. They probably told her to play up her spunky
      average-ness, which she did to the point of shtick - and
      dishonesty. Asked what her achilles heel is - a question she
      either didn't understand or chose to ignore - she
      started in on how McCain chose her because of her
      "connection to the heartland of America. Being a mom,
      one very concerned about a son in the war, about a special
      needs child, about kids heading off to college, how are we
      going to pay those tuition bills?"
      
      None of Palin's children, it should be noted, is
      heading off to college. Her son is on the way to Iraq ,
      and her pregnant 17-year-old daughter is engaged to be
      married to a high-school dropout and self-described
      "fuckin' redneck". Palin is a woman who
      can't even tell the truth about the most quotidian and
      public details of her own life, never mind about matters of
      major public import. In her only vice-presidential debate,
      she was shallow, mendacious and phoney. What kind of
      maverick, after all, keeps harping on what a maverick she
      is? That her performance was considered anything but a farce
      doesn't show how high Palin has risen, but how low we
      all have sunk.
      
      Copyright Guardian Newspapers Limited 2008

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 11:05 AM

I love it when that tradition among the best of Britain of hard-nosed plainspeaking eloquence resurfaces. Ta so!

From a geek site:

"McCain vs Obama: How the Meta-Data Stacks Up
By Micah L. Sifry, 10/13/2008 - 11:27pm


You can look up the hard numbers of "friends" each campaign has on Facebook or MySpace here on techPresident, and you can track the ups and downs of the candidates on the blogs, or see how their web traffic is doing. But here are some of the more esoteric and intriguing nuggets of meta-data I've found lying around the web in the last few days:

-# of upcoming McCain events happening within a 25 mile radius of Orlando, Florida: 8

-# of upcoming Obama events happening within a 25-mile radius of Orlando: 84

-# of upcoming McCain events within a 25-mile radius of Dayton, Ohio: 8

-# of upcoming Obama events within a 25-mile radius of Dayton: 57

-# of photos posted to Flickr since September 1, 2008 referring to, or tagged with, the word "Obama": 49,256

-# of photos in that same period referring to, or tagged with "McCain": 16,611

-# of hits on the phrase "voting for Obama" on Google blog search: 22,713

-# of hits on the phrase "voting for McCain" on Google blog search: 16,023

-Average user rating of McCain's campaign videos on YouTube until September 2008: 3.5 stars (out of 5) or higher

-Average user rating of McCain's campaign videos since the beginning of September 2008: 3 or lower (hat tip to TubeMogul)

-Total number of video views of McCain's channel on YouTube in the last month: 4.6 million

-Total number of video views of Obama's channel: 11.4 million

-Number of times Obama used the word pie at a rally in West Philadelphia on October 11: 15"

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 11:12 AM

How the candidates compare on critical technical issues: broadband policies, H1B visa, green technologies, net neutrality, etc. Worth a read.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 12:29 PM

THings are not looking good for McCain at the moment. Look for him to try a heroic reboot "underdog fights back against oppression" shtick in tonight's final Presidential Campaign debate.

The polls:

  RCP Average 10/07 - 10/14 -- 49.9 42.4 Obama +7.5 
  Rasmussen Tracking 10/12 - 10/14 3000 LV 50 45 Obama +5 
  Reuters/C-Span/Zogby Tracking 10/12 - 10/14 1210 LV 48 44 Obama +4 
  Hotline/FD Tracking 10/12 - 10/14 823 LV 49 41 Obama +8 
  GW/Battleground Tracking 10/08 - 10/14 800 LV 51 43 Obama +8 
  Gallup Tracking (Traditional)* 10/11 - 10/13 2140 LV 51 45 Obama +6 
  Gallup Tracking (Expanded)* 10/11 - 10/13 2289 LV 53 43 Obama +10 
  LA Times/Bloomberg 10/10 - 10/13 1030 LV 50 41 Obama +9 
  CBS News/NY Times 10/10 - 10/13 699 LV 53 39 Obama +14 
  Ipsos/McClatchy 10/09 - 10/13 1036 RV 48 39 Obama +9 
  Pew Research 10/09 - 10/12 1191 LV 49 42 Obama +7 
  IBD/TIPP Tracking 10/07 - 10/13 825 LV 45 42 Obama +3 
  USA Today/Gallup (Traditional)* 10/10 - 10/12 761 LV 50 46 Obama +4 
  USA Today/Gallup (Expanded)* 10/10 - 10/12 1030 LV 52 45 Obama +7 
  ABC News/Wash Post 10/08 - 10/11 766 LV 53 43 Obama +10 
  

A

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 03:31 PM

More mindless 'copy and paste'..whoopie!! Amos, Ever had an original thought??...think hard, and reach deep, before you post.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 03:40 PM

Bend over, darlin', there's a good little girly.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 03:48 PM

Oh, c'mon, Amos. You're better than that ilk...let it starve for attention.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 04:19 PM

Yeah, sorry, but not very very....

I don't know where this came from exactly--it was a recent remark attached to a different story in a Minneapolis paper:

"Featured comment

Headline to come, detaisl to follow: AK GOV Sarah Palin was indicted today on fraud charges and continued lying
Impeachment proceedings have begun by the very same Republican Party Ms. Palin filed ethics charges against to obtain high public office. … read more The irony is that Palin was recently found guilty of similiar ethics violation, a violation of public trust. Palin's VP nomination brought her to the national stage, which set the scene for greater scrutiny due to the mishandling of the AK governors office by McCain campaign operatives. That action alone outraged Alaskans and precipitated additional charges. Impeachment proceedings begin next week and could lead to the end of Ms.Palin's political career!......................"

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 05:14 PM

"Any president, Republican or Democrat, will face enormous pressure -- from his base and from entrenched interests -- in confronting this challenge. McCain has a party allergic to raising taxes. Obama has a party addicted to government spending, reflexively opposed to any benefit cuts and chafing under years of pent-up demand for new programs. "


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/14/AR2008101402562.html

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 05:32 PM

Vote on whether or not Sarah Palin is a qualified candidate for Vice Presidnet of the United Sates.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 05:35 PM

The Truth About Voter Fraud

As the 2008 election process draws near -- and with early voting in many states having already begun -- conservatives are raising a great hue and cry about the threat of voter fraud. Attacks have centered on the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), the "nation's largest grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people," whose workers have registered 1.3 million new voters this year. Conservatives like Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL) and former Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell have seized on reports of improperly filled-out forms as evidence of "lawlessness" and "voting fraud," which will lead to "the kind of chaos you expect from a category-five hurricane." But mass voter fraud is just a conservative myth used to justify increasing the difficulty of the voting process. In an interview with Salon, Lori Minnite, a professor of political science at Barnard College who investigated allegations of widespread voter fraud, explained, "From 2002 to 2005 only one person was found guilty of registration fraud. Twenty people were found guilty of voting while ineligible and five people were found guilty of voting more than once. That's 26 criminal voters -- voters who vote twice, impersonate other people, vote without being a resident ... Meanwhile thousands of people are getting turned away at the polls."

COMPLEX AND ONEROUS RULES: Although the United States has a long and dark history of voter disenfranchisement and voter suppression, recent laws passed at the state and federal level have focused instead on the vaporous threat of voter fraud. These laws particularly discourage the poor and the young. Because voting, even for federal elections, is regulated by state law and administered at the local level, there is no consistent standard for voting machines, ballot design, the counting of provisional ballots, or voter identification. The 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA) requires that "any voter who has not previously voted in a federal election" must provide a form of ID.  But "twenty-four states have broader voter identification requirements than what HAVA mandates" -- seven require photo ID for all voters, and 17 more require some form of ID. In April, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld Indiana's draconian photo ID law that could disenfranchise as many as 400,000 voters, although Indiana Secretary of State Todd Rokita "conceded the state has never presented a case of 'voter impersonation.'" In his dissent, Justice David Souter compared Indiana's unjustified regulations to a poll tax, "because it correlates with no state interest so well as it does with the object of deterring poorer residents from exercising the franchise." 

MASS DISENFRANCHISEMENT AND INTIMIDATION: Last week, the New York Times reported that "[t]ens of thousands of eligible voters in at least six swing states have been removed from the rolls or have been blocked from registering in ways that appear to violate federal law." Last Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy issued a scathing order Wednesday "lambasting the Montana Republican Party for challenging the registrations of thousands of Montana voters," writing, "The timing of these challenges is so transparent that it defies common sense to believe the purpose is anything but political chicanery." On Sunday, the Ohio Republican Party "requested information on voters who registered to vote and cast an early ballot on the same day," not long after Greene County Sheriff Gene Fischer requested registration information -- including driver's license and Social Security numbers -- "for the 302 voters who took advantage of the window in that county, which has five colleges and universities, including two historically black colleges." In Indiana, state NAACP president Barbara Bolling said voters in three northern cities "are being disenfranchised each day they can't cast ballots at their local clerk's offices," after "two Republicans on the Lake County Election Board voted against the sites last month, contending in-person absentee voting makes vote fraud easier." In Colorado, the El Paso county clerk Bob Balink has engaged in an "emerging and consistent pattern" of purging voter rolls and challenging inaccurate registration information as "election fraud." 

ROVE'S FINGERPRINTS: The Department of Justice, whose responsibilities include ensuring the right to fair elections, was subverted by the Bush administration to pursue the false threat of voter fraud. In 2002, former attorney general John Ashcroft announced an initiative that required "all components of the Department" to "place a high priority on the investigation and prosecution of election fraud." The 2006 purge of eight U.S. attorneys -- all lifelong Republicans -- at the behest of the Bush White House exposed the depths of this politicization. The White House justified the dismissals by telling reporters, "President Bush mentioned to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales in October that he had heard complaints from Congress that some federal prosecutors were lax in pursuing voter fraud." As the Washington Post reported last year, "Nearly half the U.S. attorneys slated for removal by the administration last year were targets of Republican complaints that they were lax on voter fraud, including efforts by presidential adviser Karl Rove to encourage more prosecutions of election-law violations," Rove has made it his specialty to raise the specter of vote fraud throughout his political career, from his days working on state races in Alabama. ..." (The Progressive)

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 16 Oct 08 - 11:26 AM

From ABC:

"Battleground States: Looking at the electoral landscape, there are seven must win states for McCain, including Ohio, Florida, Missouri, Colorado, Nevada, Virginia, and North Carolina.

Given the way the electoral map is right now, McCain has to win every single one of those states to eek out a narrow electoral college victory, unless there's a massive shift in the race.

Right now Obama is ahead or at the least tied in every single one of McCain's seven must-win states. If the election were held today, Obama would win 300 electoral votes -- a presidential candidate needs to win 270 to take the White House. "

---

The current state of the States:

FLORIDA: RCP Average 10/04 - 10/14 -- 49.8 45.0 Obama +4.8
OHIO: RCP Average 10/03 - 10/13 -- 48.9 45.5 Obama +3.4
COLORADO:RCP Average 10/05 - 10/14 -- 50.4 44.6 Obama +5.8
MISSOURI: RCP Average 10/04 - 10/14 -- 48.8 47.0 Obama +1.8
NEVADA:RCP Average 05/16 - 09/30 -- 54.0 35.3 McCain +18.7
VIRGINIA: RCP Average 10/03 - 10/14 -- 51.6 43.0 Obama +8.6
N. CAROLINA: RCP Average 10/03 - 10/13 -- 47.9 46.7 Obama +1.2

On a national average, Obama is pulling ahead with a 6.9% lead.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 Oct 08 - 01:46 PM

From: katlaughing
Date: 15 Oct 08 - 03:48 PM

Oh, c'mon, Amos. You're better than that ilk...let it starve for attention.   

I don't confuse attention with love.....you??

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Bobert
Date: 16 Oct 08 - 04:43 PM

Well, of course this ain't scientific 'er nuthin' but I had to fetch a hack of plywood today from Harrisonburg and drove the backroads back to stay off the I-81 and was amazed at the number of Obama signs in front yards and at driveways to farms... The Obama signs outnumbered McCain signs 2-to-1 and we're talking rural Virginia here...

In years past Dems haven't even campaigned in these counties thinking it was a waste of time and money...

Purdy heartening...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 17 Oct 08 - 10:27 AM

Acorn is a nonprofit group that advocates for low- and moderate-income people and has mounted a major voter-registration drive this year. Acorn says that it has paid more than 8,000 canvassers who have registered about 1.3 million new voters, many of them poor people and members of racial minorities.

In recent weeks, the McCain campaign has accused the group of perpetrating voter fraud by intentionally submitting invalid registration forms, including some with fictional names like Mickey Mouse and others for voters who are already registered.

Based on the information that has come to light so far, the charges appear to be wildly overblown — and intended to hobble Acorn's efforts.

The group concedes that some of its hired canvassers have turned in tainted forms, although they say the ones with phony names constitute no more than 1 percent of the total turned in. The group also says it reviews all of the registration forms that come in. Before delivering the forms to elections offices, its supervisors flag any that appear to have problems.

According to Acorn, most of the forms that are now causing controversy are ones that it flagged and that unsympathetic election officials then publicized.

Acorn's critics charge that it is creating phony registrations that ineligible voters could use to cast ballots or that a single voter could use to vote multiple times.

Acorn needs to provide more precise figures about problem forms and needs to do a better job of choosing its canvassers.

But for all of the McCain campaign's manufactured fury about vote theft (and similar claims from the Republican Party over the years) there is virtually no evidence — anywhere in the country, going back many elections — of people showing up at the polls and voting when they are not entitled to.

Meanwhile, Republicans aren't saying anything about another more serious voter-registration scandal: the fact that about one-third of eligible voters are not registered. The racial gaps are significant and particularly disturbing. According to a study by Project Vote, a voting-rights group, in 2006, 71 percent of eligible whites were registered, compared with 61 percent of blacks, 54 percent of Latinos and 49 percent of Asian-Americans.

Much of the blame for this lies with overly restrictive registration rules. Earlier this year, the League of Women Voters halted its registration drive in Florida after the state imposed onerous new requirements.

The answer is for government to a better job of registering people to vote. That way there would be less need to rely on private registration drives, largely being conducted by well-meaning private organizations that use low-paid workers. Federal and state governments should do their own large-scale registration drives staffed by experienced election officials. Even better, Congress and the states should adopt election-day registration, which would make such drives unnecessary.

The real threats to the fabric of democracy are the unreasonable barriers that stand in the way of eligible voters casting ballots.

(NYT)

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 17 Oct 08 - 01:13 PM

Online's Marc Pitzke writes:

"In the end, with this debate McCain -- in the absence of unforeseeable events -- has gambled away his best and perhaps last chance to halt Obama's climb. He fought back bravely -- and better than ever. But, the sum total was still not enough. All the subsequent flash polls crowned Obama as the debate's winner. Normally, such values are of fleeting importance. This time, however, they are decisive. The third debate in Hampstead on Long Island was considered the 'point of no return,' as even one of McCain's people in the press center said, though admittedly off the record."

"It was McCain's now-or-never moment: 19 days ahead of the election, he needed to take the helm."

The Financial Times Deutschland writes:

"McCain has also lost the last television debate against Barack Obama. The Republican US presidential candidate didn't succumb to the Democrats because he had worse arguments regarding the economy. ... In recent weeks Obama simply managed to evoke more confidence among the voters -- and confidence is tantamount to hard currency in times of crisis."

"It is curious that Obama may win the presidency on the basis of the economy of all things. After all, in his speeches across America the Democrat seems to be speaking to a country which no longer exists. ... Obama's program is a program of moderate wealth redistribution. A program with a feel-good factor. A program for an America which is not in the throes of a financial crisis."

"After the election a possible President Obama would have to react to the real America: a country with an enormous debt burden plus a costly bank rescue plan. A country in which there is not a lot left to redistribute."

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 17 Oct 08 - 03:12 PM

Electoral Count With No Toss Up States


Obama/Biden 364
McCain/Palin 174

Solid Obama
CA (55) CT (7)
DC (3) DE (3)
HI (4) IA (7)
IL (21) MA (12)
MD (10) ME (4)
MI (17) NH (4)
NJ (15) NY (31)
OR (7) PA (21)
RI (4) VT (3)
WA (11) WI (10)
Leaning Obama
CO (9) MN (10)
NM (5) VA (13)
Obama Up
FL (27) MO (11)
NC (15) NV (5)
OH (20)   
McCain Up
IN (11) ND (3)
WV (5)   
Leaning McCain
GA (15)   
Solid McCain
AK (3) AL (9)
AR (6) AZ (10)
ID (4) KS (6)
KY (8) LA (9)
MS (6) MT (3)
NE (5) OK (7)
SC (8) SD (3)
TN (11) TX (34)
UT (5) WY (3)

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: Amos
Date: 17 Oct 08 - 03:52 PM

The Los Angeles Times writes:

"It is inherent in the American character to aspire to greatness, so it can be disorienting when the nation stumbles or loses confidence in bedrock principles or institutions. That's where the United States is as it prepares to select a new president: We have seen the government take a stake in venerable private financial houses; we have witnessed eight years of executive branch power grabs and erosion of civil liberties; we are still recovering from a murderous attack by terrorists on our own soil and still struggling with how best to prevent a recurrence.

We need a leader who demonstrates thoughtful calm and grace under pressure, one not prone to volatile gesture or capricious pronouncement. We need a leader well-grounded in the intellectual and legal foundations of American freedom. Yet we ask that the same person also possess the spark and passion to inspire the best within us: creativity, generosity and a fierce defense of justice and liberty.

The Times without hesitation endorses Barack Obama for president.

Our nation has never before had a candidate like Obama, a man born in the 1960s, of black African and white heritage, raised and educated abroad as well as in the United States, and bringing with him a personal narrative that encompasses much of the American story but that, until now, has been reflected in little of its elected leadership. The excitement of Obama's early campaign was amplified by that newness. But as the presidential race draws to its conclusion, it is Obama's character and temperament that come to the fore. It is his steadiness. His maturity.

These are qualities American leadership has sorely lacked for close to a decade. The U.S. Constitution, more than two centuries old, now offers the world one of its more mature and certainly most stable governments, but our political culture is still struggling to shake off a brash and unseemly adolescence. In George W. Bush, the executive branch turned its back on an adult role in the nation and the world and retreated into self-absorbed unilateralism. ..."

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 17 Oct 08 - 05:26 PM

A Liberal Supermajority
Get ready for 'change' we haven't seen since 1965, or 1933.

If the current polls hold, Barack Obama will win the White House on November 4 and Democrats will consolidate their Congressional majorities, probably with a filibuster-proof Senate or very close to it. Without the ability to filibuster, the Senate would become like the House, able to pass whatever the majority wants.


APThough we doubt most Americans realize it, this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in U.S. history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven't since 1965, or 1933. In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s. If the U.S. really is entering a period of unchecked left-wing ascendancy, Americans at least ought to understand what they will be getting, especially with the media cheering it all on.

The nearby table shows the major bills that passed the House this year or last before being stopped by the Senate minority. Keep in mind that the most important power of the filibuster is to shape legislation, not merely to block it. The threat of 41 committed Senators can cause the House to modify its desires even before legislation comes to a vote. Without that restraining power, all of the following have very good chances of becoming law in 2009 or 2010.

- Medicare for all. When HillaryCare cratered in 1994, the Democrats concluded they had overreached, so they carved up the old agenda into smaller incremental steps, such as Schip for children. A strongly Democratic Congress is now likely to lay the final flagstones on the path to government-run health insurance from cradle to grave.

Mr. Obama wants to build a public insurance program, modeled after Medicare and open to everyone of any income. According to the Lewin Group, the gold standard of health policy analysis, the Obama plan would shift between 32 million and 52 million from private coverage to the huge new entitlement. Like Medicare or the Canadian system, this would never be repealed.

The commitments would start slow, so as not to cause immediate alarm. But as U.S. health-care spending flowed into the default government options, taxes would have to rise or services would be rationed, or both. Single payer is the inevitable next step, as Mr. Obama has already said is his ultimate ideal.

- The business climate. "We have some harsh decisions to make," Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned recently, speaking about retribution for the financial panic. Look for a replay of the Pecora hearings of the 1930s, with Henry Waxman, John Conyers and Ed Markey sponsoring ritual hangings to further their agenda to control more of the private economy. The financial industry will get an overhaul in any case, but telecom, biotech and drug makers, among many others, can expect to be investigated and face new, more onerous rules. See the "Issues and Legislation" tab on Mr. Waxman's Web site for a not-so-brief target list.

The danger is that Democrats could cause the economic downturn to last longer than it otherwise will by enacting regulatory overkill like Sarbanes-Oxley. Something more punitive is likely as well, for instance a windfall profits tax on oil, and maybe other industries.

- Union supremacy. One program certain to be given right of way is "card check." Unions have been in decline for decades, now claiming only 7.4% of the private-sector work force, so Big Labor wants to trash the secret-ballot elections that have been in place since the 1930s. The "Employee Free Choice Act" would convert workplaces into union shops merely by gathering signatures from a majority of employees, which means organizers could strongarm those who opposed such a petition.

The bill also imposes a compulsory arbitration regime that results in an automatic two-year union "contract" after 130 days of failed negotiation. The point is to force businesses to recognize a union whether the workers support it or not. This would be the biggest pro-union shift in the balance of labor-management power since the Wagner Act of 1935.

- Taxes. Taxes will rise substantially, the only question being how high. Mr. Obama would raise the top income, dividend and capital-gains rates for "the rich," substantially increasing the cost of new investment in the U.S. More radically, he wants to lift or eliminate the cap on income subject to payroll taxes that fund Medicare and Social Security. This would convert what was meant to be a pension insurance program into an overt income redistribution program. It would also impose a probably unrepealable increase in marginal tax rates, and a permanent shift upward in the federal tax share of GDP.

- The green revolution. A tax-and-regulation scheme in the name of climate change is a top left-wing priority. Cap and trade would hand Congress trillions of dollars in new spending from the auction of carbon credits, which it would use to pick winners and losers in the energy business and across the economy. Huge chunks of GDP and millions of jobs would be at the mercy of Congress and a vast new global-warming bureaucracy. Without the GOP votes to help stage a filibuster, Senators from carbon-intensive states would have less ability to temper coastal liberals who answer to the green elites.

- Free speech and voting rights. A liberal supermajority would move quickly to impose procedural advantages that could cement Democratic rule for years to come. One early effort would be national, election-day voter registration. This is a long-time goal of Acorn and others on the "community organizer" left and would make it far easier to stack the voter rolls. The District of Columbia would also get votes in Congress -- Democratic, naturally.

Felons may also get the right to vote nationwide, while the Fairness Doctrine is likely to be reimposed either by Congress or the Obama FCC. A major goal of the supermajority left would be to shut down talk radio and other voices of political opposition.

- Special-interest potpourri. Look for the watering down of No Child Left Behind testing standards, as a favor to the National Education Association. The tort bar's ship would also come in, including limits on arbitration to settle disputes and watering down the 1995 law limiting strike suits. New causes of legal action would be sprinkled throughout most legislation. The anti-antiterror lobby would be rewarded with the end of Guantanamo and military commissions, which probably means trying terrorists in civilian courts. Google and MoveOn.org would get "net neutrality" rules, subjecting the Internet to intrusive regulation for the first time.

It's always possible that events -- such as a recession -- would temper some of these ambitions. Republicans also feared the worst in 1993 when Democrats ran the entire government, but it didn't turn out that way. On the other hand, Bob Dole then had 43 GOP Senators to support a filibuster, and the entire Democratic Party has since moved sharply to the left. Mr. Obama's agenda is far more liberal than Bill Clinton's was in 1992, and the Southern Democrats who killed Al Gore's BTU tax and modified liberal ambitions are long gone.

In both 1933 and 1965, liberal majorities imposed vast expansions of government that have never been repealed, and the current financial panic may give today's left another pretext to return to those heydays of welfare-state liberalism. Americans voting for "change" should know they may get far more than they ever imagined.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: PoppaGator
Date: 17 Oct 08 - 05:58 PM

And this is a bad thing? ;^)

I have a problem with any essay that sneers at "free speech and voting rights."

Seriously, though, I do understand that some of those rightist concerns are legit. Nevertheless, I absolutely believe that it is well past time for the pendulum to swing back from the steadily intensifying right-wing rule, and the growing power of the miliitary-industrial complex, that we've been enduring since 1980.

Subject: RE: BS: Notes on the Presidential Campaign
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Oct 08 - 04:23 PM

Surely the picture on this page should settle the question of who is fit for purpose. Any purpose.

I mean, be serious.