LIEBERMAN’S NOT A DEMOCRAT ANYMORE.

Is CT an exception to this poll?

And the GOP ad is spectacularly awful. The soldiers at the beginning of the ad look dead, fer chrissake.

…Well, so much for that “no one knows what Democrats stand for” meme, huh?….

Um, you mean like Jane Hamsher claimed only yesterday on this very blog?–

….I know it’s hard to be a woman running for President, but her husband triangulated the party right out of an identity in the 90s and we’ve been paying the price ever since….

Uh… Your Point?

Is Hillary the only Democrat in existence?

Or is she the only one you really notice?

Both points that Jane makes are valid. Clinton did triangulate the party out of its identity with the American public (a p.r. issue), but that doesn’t mean Democrats stopped standing for anything. They didn’t. They stand for plenty of things, and even the public know what those are, despite a near-blackout of the Dem message from the media.

Why don’t you take the anti-blog out of your name and just go by b.s., because that’s all you’ve offered here.

Message to Lieberman, the GOP, and the Pentagon: Better trolls, please.

…Well, so much for that “no one knows what Democrats stand for” meme, huh?….

Um, you mean like Jane Hamsher claimed only yesterday on this very blog?–

….I know it’s hard to be a woman running for President, but her husband triangulated the party right out of an identity in the 90s and we’ve been paying the price ever since….

Polls: I suspect the Republicans are so desperate they’ll try anything to muddy the waters. The polls have favored Dems for some time now, so it’s not terribly surprising they’re posting different numbers — trying to keep their voters interested in voting. Just ignore the polls from here on in. This is all out war all over the country. If we’re winning any seats in Idaho (of all places) then we should even be in Georgia and Alabama kickin ass and takin’ names.

There should be focus in the tight senate races, but any House race within -5 points should be considered a tossup we could win.

If there are about 100 races contested and maybe only 80 seriously, then let’s take 90% of ‘em — that’s 72 seats! Go for it!

Kinda looks like Ned, if you look at the face. :)

I’m flexible on the upper limit; it’s just that I don’t want someone being able to get, say, five hundred very-small-amount no-bid contracts for the same thing as a way of getting one much-larger no-bid contract. I know someone will find a way around just about any rule or regulation designed to prevent this kind of – well, I don’t know that illegality is the best word for it – but I’d like to see better use of controls on these things. Starting with making politicians sell stocks or put them in a genuinely blind trust upon being nominated for office, as a pre-condition for election. (No, I don’t like Cheney or Frist.)