Comments on: Remember When… http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/ Firedoglake weblog Fri, 27 Nov 2009 07:13:59 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: tanbark http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1154273 tanbark Tue, 18 Dec 2007 18:44:37 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1154273 <p>Cinnamon; corporate money is going to count less in this election than any in a long, long, time. </p> <p>And if it flows to Mitt, or Huck, or Giuliani; Edwards, if he’s nominated, will delight in pointing it out to the voters. :o)</p> Cinnamon; corporate money is going to count less in this election than any in a long, long, time.

And if it flows to Mitt, or Huck, or Giuliani; Edwards, if he’s nominated, will delight in pointing it out to the voters. :o)

]]> By: cinnamonape http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1154037 cinnamonape Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:52:28 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1154037 <blockquote><p>Somewhere yesterday I read a good post about how Hillary’s negatives are probably so high because she’s been in the public (wingnut) crosshairs for so long. As a thought experiment, think of how high Obama’s might be if he had a long a history as she. Think there’s some truth in that.</p></blockquote> <p>I think you are correct. Everyone has pretty much developed a polarized position of Clinton.The critical thing is how many of those are Democrats who would never vote for her. Because if the 40% are Republicans then she might very well get the remainder. Some of those are Democrats who would “hold their nose”.</p> <p>If a good number of those polarised voters who would refuse to vote for her are Democrats then she might still win (perhaps by even more than if they were all Repugs). Because that would mean SOME Republicans would consider her…and those Democrats that didn’t would likely simply “sit out” rather than vote for a Republican like Giuliani, Romney or Huckabee.</p> <p>And it’s likely that the “Wouldn’t Vote For” ratings of other Democratic candidates would go up when the Republican attack machine swings into motion. That machine might be weakened this year, due to reduced contributions to the RNC, but I think if Edwards was the nominee, for example, you’d see a lot of $$$ flowing into the eventual Republican nominees coffers (and various PACs) from corporate America.</p> <p>I bet Kerry had very low “Would not vote for” ratings UNTIL he became the nominee. Then he became the devil incarnate.</p>

Somewhere yesterday I read a good post about how Hillary’s negatives are probably so high because she’s been in the public (wingnut) crosshairs for so long. As a thought experiment, think of how high Obama’s might be if he had a long a history as she. Think there’s some truth in that.

I think you are correct. Everyone has pretty much developed a polarized position of Clinton.The critical thing is how many of those are Democrats who would never vote for her. Because if the 40% are Republicans then she might very well get the remainder. Some of those are Democrats who would “hold their nose”.

If a good number of those polarised voters who would refuse to vote for her are Democrats then she might still win (perhaps by even more than if they were all Repugs). Because that would mean SOME Republicans would consider her…and those Democrats that didn’t would likely simply “sit out” rather than vote for a Republican like Giuliani, Romney or Huckabee.

And it’s likely that the “Wouldn’t Vote For” ratings of other Democratic candidates would go up when the Republican attack machine swings into motion. That machine might be weakened this year, due to reduced contributions to the RNC, but I think if Edwards was the nominee, for example, you’d see a lot of $$$ flowing into the eventual Republican nominees coffers (and various PACs) from corporate America.

I bet Kerry had very low “Would not vote for” ratings UNTIL he became the nominee. Then he became the devil incarnate.

]]> By: goldstandard http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1154003 goldstandard Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:25:41 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1154003 <p>This headline over at The Huffington Post was laughable, and I had a hard time keeping breakfast down.<br /> <strong>Bill Clinton: Bush Sr Will Help President Hillary</strong><br /> Maybe it’s me, but isn’t it time to put the final nail in the coffin of the Bush/Clinton/Bush dynasty? In just what he accomplished yesterday, Senator Dodd is a standout. Return the country to the rule of law under the Constitution and steady our foundation rather than piling more garbage on a foundation of quicksand. Just a thought.</p> This headline over at The Huffington Post was laughable, and I had a hard time keeping breakfast down.
Bill Clinton: Bush Sr Will Help President Hillary
Maybe it’s me, but isn’t it time to put the final nail in the coffin of the Bush/Clinton/Bush dynasty? In just what he accomplished yesterday, Senator Dodd is a standout. Return the country to the rule of law under the Constitution and steady our foundation rather than piling more garbage on a foundation of quicksand. Just a thought.

]]> By: MDCitizen http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153989 MDCitizen Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:16:33 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153989 <p>Rehabilitate Hell!<br /> The first thing the new president should do is frog-march the current one to the Hague to be tried for war crimes.</p> Rehabilitate Hell!
The first thing the new president should do is frog-march the current one to the Hague to be tried for war crimes.

]]> By: tanbark http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153973 tanbark Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:05:15 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153973 <p>BTW; I like DaddyBush crying in front of the Florida legislature, waaayyy better than in Clinton-sponsored rehab, at taxpayer expense. And, I bet the voters’ will, too. :o)</p> BTW; I like DaddyBush crying in front of the Florida legislature, waaayyy better than in Clinton-sponsored rehab, at taxpayer expense. And, I bet the voters’ will, too. :o)

]]> By: tanbark http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153968 tanbark Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:02:11 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153968 <p>Beefart; Michelle knows a good, malodorous, red-herring…being used to cover the smell of decaying human flesh in Iraq, when she sniffs one.</p> Beefart; Michelle knows a good, malodorous, red-herring…being used to cover the smell of decaying human flesh in Iraq, when she sniffs one.

]]> By: WarOnWarOff http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153967 WarOnWarOff Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:01:01 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153967 <p>WRT telecommunications, saw this in today’s <a href="http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/E7-24506.htm" rel="nofollow">Federal Register</a>…not sure what it’s about:</p> <blockquote><p>ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD</p> <p>36 CFR Parts 1193 and 1194</p> <p>RIN 3014-AA22</p> <p>Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines; Electronic and<br /> Information Technology Accessibility Standards</p> <p>AGENCY: Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board.</p> <p>ACTION: Notice of meeting.</p> <p>SUMMARY: The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board<br /> (Access Board) has established a Telecommunications and Electronic and<br /> Information Technology Advisory Committee (Committee) to assist it in<br /> revising and updating accessibility guidelines for telecommunications<br /> products and accessibility standards for electronic and information<br /> technology. This notice announces the dates, times, and location of two<br /> upcoming committee meetings, one of which will be a conference call and<br /> the other will be an in-person meeting.</p> <p>DATES: The conference call is scheduled for January 2, 2008 (beginning<br /> at 1 p.m. and ending at 4 p.m. Eastern time). The in-person meeting<br /> will take place on January 7-9, 2008 (beginning at 8:30 a.m. and ending<br /> at 6 p.m. each day).</p> <p>ADDRESSES: Individuals can participate in the conference call on<br /> January 2, 2008 by dialing the teleconference numbers which will be<br /> posted on the Access Board’s Web site at <a href="http://www.access-board.gov/sec508/update-index.htm." rel="nofollow">http://www.access-board.gov/se.....index.htm.</a></p></blockquote> WRT telecommunications, saw this in today’s Federal Register…not sure what it’s about:

ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD

36 CFR Parts 1193 and 1194

RIN 3014-AA22

Telecommunications Act Accessibility Guidelines; Electronic and
Information Technology Accessibility Standards

AGENCY: Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
(Access Board) has established a Telecommunications and Electronic and
Information Technology Advisory Committee (Committee) to assist it in
revising and updating accessibility guidelines for telecommunications
products and accessibility standards for electronic and information
technology. This notice announces the dates, times, and location of two
upcoming committee meetings, one of which will be a conference call and
the other will be an in-person meeting.

DATES: The conference call is scheduled for January 2, 2008 (beginning
at 1 p.m. and ending at 4 p.m. Eastern time). The in-person meeting
will take place on January 7-9, 2008 (beginning at 8:30 a.m. and ending
at 6 p.m. each day).

ADDRESSES: Individuals can participate in the conference call on
January 2, 2008 by dialing the teleconference numbers which will be
posted on the Access Board’s Web site at http://www.access-board.gov/se…..index.htm.

]]> By: selise http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153966 selise Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:00:32 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153966 <p>lol.</p> <p>seriously though, thanks for the reminder - i’ve now dugg it too (i had rated it and favorited it in youtube) but digg is better. hope lots of people see it.</p> lol.

seriously though, thanks for the reminder – i’ve now dugg it too (i had rated it and favorited it in youtube) but digg is better. hope lots of people see it.

]]> By: tanbark http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153965 tanbark Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:59:30 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153965 <p>Atta boy, Ataturk; We need all the reminders of how politically “savvy” is La Clinton that we can get. :o)<br /> Some of this HAS to be making it into the ken of the Iowa caucusers. And the New Hampshire people, as well. </p> <p> Anybody got any more shots of her holding joint press-conferences with Joe Lieberman, 4 days before he endorses a republican for prez? </p> <p>:o) :o) :o)</p> Atta boy, Ataturk; We need all the reminders of how politically “savvy” is La Clinton that we can get. :o)
Some of this HAS to be making it into the ken of the Iowa caucusers. And the New Hampshire people, as well.

Anybody got any more shots of her holding joint press-conferences with Joe Lieberman, 4 days before he endorses a republican for prez?

:o) :o) :o)

]]> By: Beerfart Liberal http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153964 Beerfart Liberal Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:57:58 +0000 http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/18/remember-when/#comment-1153964 <p>Checked to see what Malkin was screeching about this a.m. “House guts border fence.” That’s lead post-worthy, huh? At least she has priorities. They’re stupid. But she got ‘em.</p> Checked to see what Malkin was screeching about this a.m. “House guts border fence.” That’s lead post-worthy, huh? At least she has priorities. They’re stupid. But she got ‘em.

]]>