Login HereKucinich has thrown his second-round support behind Obama, and the rumor is Richardson will do the same. The Iowa Independent chalks it up to a desire to hurt Edwards' chances with second round votes, damaging his campaign and potentially elevating Richardson into the #3 spot as the race moves forward.
Likewise, the Clinton campaign would like nothing more than to take out Obama, and rumor has it they are willing to take a third place finish if they can push Edwards into first. Read Desmoinesdem's excellent article on second choice math over at MyDD, but it isn't just the candidates who won't reach 15% viability who can direct their votes -- candidates who reach viability can also direct and swap votes. If Hillary can help Edwards, she probably will.
The beneficiary of much of the Huckabee/Romney squabble seems to be McCain. As Tom Schaller notes, if Huckabee can damage Romney in Iowa, he goes into New Hampshire wounded and an easier target for McCain. Also, as McCain is on the ascent in New Hampshire, his support is coming from "independents" and pulling largely from -- Barack Obama. McCain could actually damage Obama's New Hampshire chances more than anyone, and thus rumor has it the Obama campaign may be thinking of taking McCain on directly there next week.
*Update: The Richardson campaign reports that they have made no deals.
Spotlight
Support this site!
Keep
up with news
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
RSS/XML Feed
zed
Jane!!!!
Jane!
Dont you mean Obama?
Kucinich has thrown his second-round support behind Edwards, and the rumor is Richardson will do the same. The Iowa Independent chalks it up to a desire to hurt Edwards’ chances with second round votes, damaging his campaign and potentially elevating Richardson into the #3 spot as the race moves forward.
that is what i believe bastids!
How was the Edwards campaign event with Mellencamp? I thought we were going to get a report on that. ;-) I’d rather read about it from you and not Joke Line.
yea
Didn’t Dennis throw his support behind Obama the other day?
they are throwing it to Obama (not Edwards), right?
Jane:
Typo: the Clinton campaign…
interesting, interesting, interesting…
Does anyone know when we will get the final results of the Iowa caucus?
Huh?
Hi, Jane, and all!
At last it is beginning. I hope it goes well for my candidate, Edwards, but at least we can start thinking about the end product.
I have married friends going to the Dem caucus in Ames tonight. One is going for Biden on the first and her husband for Edwards. They also like Obama and Dodd. I will be interested to hear what they finally decide on.
fixed
Kucinich has thrown his second-round support behind Obama…
If this is true, Kucinich has regained a good deal of the respect I lost for him when he designated Obama for his second-round votes.
If Hillary can help Edwards, she probably will.
you mean that HRC might ask people who just got finished voting for her to switch on the second ballot and vote for Edwards instead? I dunno about that one.
I mean, if my candidate came to me and asked me to do that, solely for the purpose of screwing over someone else, I’d be re-thinking my original support - which would then seem to be of a person who seems craven, and back-room dirty.
Well, now I feel a litle better over my goof on the previous thread.
Everyone refresh please — error fixed. Jane’s getting ready to head out to cover more ground today, sorry for the blip.
yes,must be type o
Wow this stuff is cold-blooded! Hillary wants to take third to knock out Obama with Edwards? Ouch! That would be as nasty as hoping Kucinich drops out so that his disappointed hot redheaded spouse will divorce him and be available for… hmmm… I may have to go peel that Kucinich bumper-sticker off my car!
Directing and swapping votes out of a viable candidate preference group can be very risky. Some caucus-goers leave the building after the first round, which can change the denominator for second-round viability. It’s easy to slip below 15% even as you think you’re “helping” other candidates achieve it.
From the Richardson link in the post:
Sounds like bad news. I hope this doesn’t happen.
This is getting too weird for me, although I do enjoy Jane’s on the spot reporting.
Ah. I knew this caucus stuff was complicated, but I was having trouble wrapping my mind around Jane’s original post.
anybody cold and hungry?….have some black beans and rice
http://www.wholefoodsmarket.co.....nbacon.jpg
OK. I refreshed the page. Kucinich is firmly outside my good graces once again.
Heard Nader threw his support behind Edwards. That’s a big endorsement IMO. Calls him a ‘Glimmer of Hope’.
Hi Jane!
Confession: this stuff makes my head hurt. It’s HEQQ, this place we Dems be in, with way-y-y too many viable candidates.
I look a-x the aisle and start giggling . . . Then I remember how stoopid chimpy looked, & I sober up considerably.
Be careful, Dems. Be careful what you say you wish for. Be very very careful.
Still & all, … I have hope again… *g*
Really? I’ll believe that when I see it happen.
This “we’ll take third place” spin from Hillary’s camp is absolutely ludicrous, but it indicates their internals and ground game show them it might happen. They’re pre-spinning a third-place finish!
Hillary will be crippled by a third-place finish, no matter the spin.
I don’t know anything first-hand, but others here have commented that Nader currently commands little if any electoral weight.
yea…im very surprised
and he knows how high the stakes are
FAILURE IS not an option
F…him
I hope with all my heart that the folks in Iowa choose a candidate that has no present and/or prior connections to Joe Lieberman.
Yep: trouble for Repugs in Iowa and perhaps the nation:
Link: http://www.desmoinesregister.c...../801030393
This is where politics trump principle. I am disappointed by both Kucinich and Richardson. Edwards is far closer to their stated views than either Obama or Hillary.
Okayy. Now that K’s back with Ob., & not trying to hurt E. by supporting him, my head doesn’t hurt any more. Things make sense again, sorta.
Thanks for edit & refresh,
and GOOD MORNING to ya Redd! ;->
Yeah, saying it is all part of the “plan” is not very persuasive, is it?
What might be helpful, is if Nader supported the Democratic nominee in the general election. If in the general, he encourages anti-Republican voters to take their marbles and go home, or vote for a forlorn hope, it will be the same old assistance to neocons, religeous fanatics, and robber barons.
very educational piece here, I didn’t realize there was so much gamesmanship going on
I have to disagree with the assessment that Hilary wants to throw support toward Edwards though, he is a real contender and if it looks like he can go the distance I think he takes out Hillary and Obama
Would Nader perhaps lure some cranky fellas outta the woodwork to take the trouble to vote, rather than sit on the side grousing? If they’d vote for Edwards, I’d not turn them away…
OT, but I’m trying to finish an e-mail and I have a question. Does the FISA legislation that they’re going to be considering this month have a provision for data retention in it? If it does, does anyone know how it compares to the data retention law that just went into effect in Germany? Re:
“Kucinich has thrown his second-round support behind Obama, and the rumor is Richardson will do the same. The Iowa Independent chalks it up to a desire to hurt Edwards’ chances with second round votes, damaging his campaign and potentially elevating Richardson into the #3 spot as the race moves forward.”
As an Iowa Caucus participant - this seems arrogant and grandiose. Like Richardson and Kucinich can dictate to their supporters who to support? I like Dodds take on this. He said who am I to tell Iowand who to support? I hope all of the non-viable Kucinich and Richardson Supporters backs their legitimate second choice candidate. T
Good morning, Adie! This is still making my head hurt!
Yeah, saying it is all part of the “plan” is not very persuasive, is it?
The idea that she would go to her dedicated supporters, and ask them to vote for somebody else on the second ballot? I’m not buying it either.
Im confused. I thought support was thrown only if one didnt get to 15%
okay now im totally confused…who is throwing their support where?
Yes, Kucinich was on my short list at one point. However, his suggestion of having Ron Paul as his running mate and his support for Obama changed my mind 180 degrees. No way I’d support him now.
What happens in Iowa will have a direct bearing on what takes place in the world soon.
I wouldn’t put too much stock into these rumors.
I have been to a good many of these affairs and most of the folks are pretty damn independent. Where some high paid out of state campaign strategist thinks they should go, if their candidate isn’t viable, doesn’t have much to do with anything. More important is what your buddy, your neighbor, your cousin and so on asks you to do.
Yeah, that’s right…
nader may not have any electoral weight, but he still have a lot of moral authority, no matter the undeserved blame he gets for running in ‘00. edwards is my candidate, so if nader did endorse him, even better. edwards is a good match for former nader supporters, such as myself.
ok must do lunch…keep the home fires burning yall
Edwards must be doing something right if they are so skeered they are already making contingency plans.
Some cut throat shit, ain’t it?
Hi Lea. Top o’ the morning to you and the family!
Yeah. The intrigue is always there, and often it stinks. I just hope everyone keeps cool heads. We’ve got a nation, a world, and the future of a bunch’a kids at stake.
Would that all those politicos who think they’re saving the world if they do unto their neighbor before the neighbor…. go sit in a corner and let their heads shrink back to normal size before proceeding.
There is some complicated math involved. There is rounding done and in certain precincts, For example HRC may have 8 or 9 supporters that can not be counted because it does not bring her to the next percentage level and would not gain an electoral vote. The precinct captain could then have those “extra” supporters head over to Edwards an boost him up a percentage point thus giving him an additional electoral vote.
Is there animosity between Kucinich and Edwards? Or do we just not understand Rep. Kucinich (thinking of his wife saying that he would not mind sharing a ticket with Ron Paul)? CAN he be understood?
I like Dodds take on this. He said who am I to tell Iowans who to support? I hope all of the non-viable Kucinich and Richardson Supporters backs their legitimate second choice candidate.
I think Dodd’s correct. Kucinich supporters would be, pretty much by definition, idealistic and ready to buck the system. Dennis the K is overrating his personal appeal - what sells Kucinich is his *positions*, not his personality, or cute wife.
Likewise Richardson voters. These candidates are wrong in thinking that their supporters love them personally - it’s an issues-based election. Those supporters are gonna go with the candidate whose position they most identify with - the “sheep factor” is, I think, not gonna play out.
The only sure thing we know is that the athletic supporters are being thrown in the laundry.
I hope you’re right on that one. I’ve been a Dodd supporter so far, but supported Edwards in 2004. If Dodd pulls out, I’m with Edwards in a heartbeat. My primary vote here in FL is not likely to mean much, but I will cast it for the best candidate running.
Just heard Vilsack on a radio interview. When asked why he’s supporting Clinton, the first thing he says is (paraphrase) “I was just talking to Lindsay Graham, and he talked about how nice it was working with Hillary on a bill they worked on together, so she can reach across the aisle….blah blah blah.”
This is his main reason for supporting Clinton? Because LindsayWhat? Graham says she’s A-OK?!?! This thing about Democrats trying to win the favor of death-loving and debt-loving Repubes is officially an sickness now.
BigMoney is trying so hard to supress us right now. We must rise up Netroots like never before! The battle is just beginning.
I think it’s more in the form of a recommendation. They know they can’t mandate how a person caucuses. Last time Edward and Kusinch reached an agreement that each would recommend it for each other in districts where their support didn’t reach 15 percent. One post yesterday indicated that Edwards’ campaign declined to do that this time, believing it would not work to their benefit (no link as I don’t remember where it was).
As far as principle versus pragmatics, I think they all rationalize with: “I believe it best if I win the nomination. This is the move required now for me to have the best chance to win the nomination.”
Jane, thanks so much for your terrific coverage.
I have been interested in that subject and have never seen it brought up in conjunction with the FISA discussions.
-um-, speaking as one who was present when Kucinich bankrupted Cleveland in a major whoopsie way back…. stay tuned and vigilent…. i think he’s changed considerably since then….. still….. *shudder*
kucinich is disappointing- i’ve always said that on the issues, he’s dead on, but he lacks that jenesaisquois quality of leadership that can vault him into contention, or even make a statement- maybe the sourness he always answers questions, or talking in campaign statements all the time. he has a right to ask his supporters to do whatever, but doubt that his followers will blindly do his bidding… i suspect his voters will look at the issues and go with edwards. richardson’s supporters seem a better fit for second tier obama or clinton supporters.
No, that isn’t right.
For example, if you need 25 for a delegate, and candidate X has 33 and candidate Y has 23, if the people with candidate X see they have no chance at getting to 50, it is possible that several from X would move to Y, making Y viable.
Keep in mind, Vilsack used to be the head of the DLC. That should tell you something. He also ran for president as a favor for HRC so she could skip Iowa. When he ditched his campaign, HRC paid off Vilsacks campaign debt. He is of the same mold as GOP-Lite HRC. Which is why I do not get why so many Democrats would support her.
Ann
Telecoms already keep your data for about that long, as evidenced by one of the manuals that was liberated last year some time–6 months.
As it is, the FISA leg still doesn’t have as much governing minimization as Whitehouse would like it to have–minimization would cover what they do with your data when they pick it up by accident. Right now, there is no oversight to make sure DOJ is doing what it says it’s doing wrt minimization.
Well, I know that the ability to work with mealymouthed, backstabbing Republicans like Huckleberry ranks high with Lieberman voters, all one of them.
Yikes this is rocket science!
How ’bout a combo of the 2? or Dodd ML in Senate? I agree with you: Edwards & Dodd are the class of the field, and the “worst” of the field ain’t half bad. (Gravel’s gone already, right? heh) ;->
Black beans and rice
Lookin fine to this gluten sensitive person.
That would, I think, fall under the minimization provisions of the FISA bill and as far as I know these are pretty vague, as in not used but probably not destroyed.
Had the same the other night….a favorite here
I find it interesting that there is very little mention of Dodd in the shuffling around. And he is the only one of the sitting congresspeople who has done anything real lately. Because he is a New Englander, does he rely more on the NH vote? It seems that with all this Iowa talk, NH is forgotten. IIRC, both taken together set the framework for the next round of state primaries, not just Iowa. But since Iowa is today, all eyes are there, eh?
oh yum! We had red beans & rice twice this week, & everyone was still reaching for seconds. but i digress…. *stomach growls*
Two Liebercrats in a pod.
Someone up top asked about the Mellencamp event for Edwards. Kristine from IA posted on the previous thread. Said it was rockin’ with a very good turnout.
Yeah, and my dad is a rocket scientist. So I usually assume I got some of his genes, but still . . .
Edwards and Dodd are fast becoming the two stand out Democratic candidates. They put their priniciples first. I hope they keep it up.
Bad news for Hil:
Thanks for the insight. As for why so many Dems support fake Dems…this is why I think the Media issues are the perhaps the most important we face right now. If there was an actual press pursuing truth as it’s main goal, our modern day Repubes and their supporters like Clinton would be laughed out of the room, since many of their stands make no sense whatsoever. The electorate would be voting in more and better Dems and Repubes.
Instead, we’ve had entire generations grow up with the carefully constructed frames the Dems are irresponsible children that tax and spend, while Repubes are the grown-ups that will take of everything. We know that in truth it is the exact opposite.
Getting people to change their opinions and actions is incredibly difficult, so this is going to take a while.
sadlyyes, here’s the link you asked for downstairs
http://www.johnedwards.com/myvote/
Well, it’s not brain surgery.
Even “rocket science” ain’t rocket science.
Dodd is THE grownup in a terrific field of good candidates. [ eat yer heart out, pugs!]
Dodd has the gravitas. He doesn’t seem to indulge in the sniveling little back-biting gamesmanship others sink to on occasion… nastiness that only reveals weakness, lack of confidence or a sense of real purpose. He gives every appearance of having the strength and ability to truly get. things. done.
The other candidates would do well to watch him and learn.
Plus, face it, he seems to be a truly decent hoomin bein’ complete with humility and a sense of humor.
Egad! A liberal intellectual you can share a beer with. HAH!
But, but, my sister is a doctor! (Not a brain surgeon, though. She wanted to serve the masses. She’s a commie)
Do they do exit polls with caucuses?
YESSSS!
If his candidacy doesn’t work out, I’d hate for Dodd to lose his seniority in the Senate. He would make a fantastic ML. As Hugh said, he and Edwards have focused on principles and that is what is so sorely lacking. Harry Reid wouldn’t know a principle if it smacked him on the forehead.
I think it is less to do with stopping Edwards and more to slow down Hill.
It keeps the race ‘interesting’ more people watch, more people learn, change happens faster..
Dennis Kucinich has been solid in his beliefs. His care for his fellow beings is genuine. His love for his country and its peoples (all people) is core. Dennis Kucinich is a seasoned ‘politican’ who came up from the street so he knows the REAL world. He stood against ‘The War’ from the beginning.
He stood against the ‘Patriot Act’ from the beginning. He brought to the floor IMPEACHMENT.
He has experience, he is smart, he is committed, he ‘knows’ the real world and he wants to change it for the better for everyone.
Also, his wife is an English-woman who has been to refugee camps, held hungry children, talked with mothers, daughters etc , so he is aware that a real world out ‘there’ too.
Oh, an irresponsible tax and spender no doubt. Why does has the baby Jesus? ;)
Dodd is definitely the class act of the bunch. He’d be my first choice, except for the fact that he opposes prosecuting the criminals inside the Bush administration. So far as I know, Edwards has not explicitly rejected the concept.
Yes. Yes. My ultimate choice is Edwards-Dodd ‘08 or Dodd-Edwards ‘08. Media be damned.
make that, “why does she hate the baby Jesus?”
yes, but you B.L.O.G.!
and i’ll wager you know how to chew a pretzel before swallowing it. ;->
It might be that Dodd would have more influence as a senator than as a (traditional) VP. (IMHO, it was a setback for the Dems when Humphrey became VP.)
Bad news for Hill
Can’t imagine working for Hillary while losing ground.
“Blue Room” takes on new meaning.
I think the idea that Hillary is, to a micron of a degree, willing to run third in Iowa to help Edwards and somehow, thereby, hurt Obama, is the purest nonsense.
If she comes in third place in Iowa, she and the beltway dems that we progressives have been fighting against for these past years will be shitting green nickels. That won’t be strategic; it’ll be panic-city.
:o)
I would LOVE to see her place third in Iowa. :o)
The coronation process will come to a screeching halt, and Pope Hillary the 1st will have to get out of the limo and trudge, and talk about her sucking up to the right.
If she doesn’t win in Iowa, it will make it that much more likely that the annointing or her as the nominee (which we’ve been seeing in the MSM, who would be nearly orgasmic at the chance to have all the “issues” rolled into one, and that one named Hillary Clinton, for them to help the GOP crawl into the lifeboat) will cease, and it will extend the primaries as real contests, and THAT she simply cannot afford. If she doesn’t have the nomination in hand after South Carolina, she will not win it.
Bubba, a few days ago, faced with the reality of her drop in the polls, tried to cover her ass, with his little speech about “We’re not planning on winning every primary; we just going to pick up delegates for the long haul” or somesuch bullshit. If it’s still the horserace going into the spring, her chances will be slim and none.
A third place Iowa finish for the candidate with one hand on Joe Lieberman’s ass, and the other one on Rupert Murdoch’s ass?
Bring it on.
As an Edwards supporter, that’s a “strategy” with all the political acumen of Hillary’s triangulating over to the darkside for the past five years.
We can deal with THAT. :o) :o) :o)
I hate pretzels! Always have. Both of my sisters ate them like potato chips growing up. I don’t like potato chips either. Is that why I blog?
Dodd has publicly stated that a 4th place finish is his ticket out of Iowa. If he does not get a 4th place, I think he will call it quits.
No — they do reporting of actual results. Caucuses are public events, with votes tabulated on the spot, and the results are announced in the room as each meeting concludes. No need for an exit poll, because the actual results are already in when folks head out the door. (These also get reported to a centralized location, to sort out the specific results as to exactly how many delegates have been won by each candidate.)
Thus, in place of exit polls trying to predict the final results, caucuses produce lots of post-caucus spin, trying to analyze what it means.
But if you’re an exit poll junky, you don’t have to wait long for NH.
Thanks, Marcy and thank you, too, Wigwam and Hugh. Finally finished my e-mail. Now I can go back to reading the comments.
it would be better if dodd stayed and led the senate as ML than campaign as VP, no matter how cool that ticket would be
so if Hil fades maybe the election cant be bought
There will be entrance polls in Iowa, however, which will give us a chance to compare the caucus results to a sample of people entering the caucuses. Not sure how valuable they’ll be, or whether they’ll be ready before the actual results.
Both give every appearance of being approachable, reasonable people who are constantly thinking and re-thinking issues, thinking OUTSIDE and BEYOND their own personal fortunes. I like the combo - whether with Dodd on the ticket or as Majority Leader - because I think they honestly, truly would work together.
Plus, ethics shows bright, fresh, clear as a bell, in pretty much everything they do, and HOW they do it. As does courage and compassion.
besides, [Fauxneeeews must hate this above all], they both have good hair, heh.
nah. but it might help explain why yer keyboard doesn’t short-out as often as theirs. ;->
We like Edwards and Dodd. Hopfully, like Rudy, we will have a couple of Democrats heading for the Florida beaches soon.
Lahoma and I will just be glad when this thing is over. And we can happily say NH, here we come.
Adie, if I recall correctly, Kucinich was manipulated to turn the utilities over to private firms, and he refused on principle. He wasn’t re-elected. He was proven right when the utilities soared. You were there is that true? Personally, I’m disgusted with Kucinich’s decision re Obama.
at the very least, it sounds like camp hillary is preemptively spinning a loss. nauseating. i for one have had enough of her mechanizations. there’s not a single thing you can trust about the woman other than the fact that she is rabid to be president.
How effective is it when a candidate “throws his second round support” to another? After all, the caucus attendees aren’t robots. I could well imagine a Kucinich supporter finding Edwards a more attractive second-round choice than Obama, for example, despite Kucinich’s endorsement of Obama as a second-round choice.
where are you getting that please? (not that she is a lying sack of shit, that they are spinning a loss)
I did a little research on Kucinich’s mayoral experience and I didn’t have it quite right, but he did stand up and even had a mafai hit out on him, for doing so. He lost to Voinivich, but ended up saving the city millions because of his stand in the decade following.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D......80.931979
I’m still a Dodd supporter
Chimpy doesn’t give a f*ck about Iowa:
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/aponlin.....aucus.html
People are much more likely to either make up their own minds about who to support on the second-round (actually going with their second choce) or join up with folks they know in a viable caucus — their spouse, friends, workmates, or neighbors. I imagine most caucus-goers have a real second choice — they know how this process works and are probably realistic about their candidate’s chance of viability.
“Throwing support” is more for media consumption than to influence actual caucus-goers, I imagine. Not sure the media would be talking very much about Dennis yesterday unless he’d made his statement about Obama.
All he has to do is be his usual vigilant self, wait for another attack and watch the repubs win again.
Carmen, I was living in OH, but not that close to the action, and certainly not involved in politics enough to know what actually was going on. I just know it was an absolute mess, and it seemed that Kucinich’s woeful lack of experience seemed to play a huge part in allowing things to get out of hand. He’s grown up a lot since then, and I’m continually impressed these days by his eloquence, spunk and commitment to serving the public good. I buy his populist line as truly genuine. I just will never quite be sure he’d be able to out-power the K-Street mob & cutthroat pros in D.C. I delight in having him in Congress though. The rest of my feelings say more about my own failings than his. He’s a good guy, and I think he can be trusted to try to give his very best in any job he tackles.
BTW Froomkin is up.
Hillary’s not my 1st choice by a long shot, but I can’t find any particular fault in her for what you relate. Isn’t she just playing the game of politics, as most successful politicians feel they must these days?
The folks like Dodd are rare, very rare indeed. That doesn’t make the others’ style criminal. eh?
Looks like AP has written off Hillary in Iowa:
That’s that “loose meat” business again. Yikes!
Link: http://www.nytimes.com/aponlin.....lysis.html
Isn’t she just playing the game of politics, as most successful politicians feel they must these days?
damned by faint praise
Carmen, in my mind, sen. voino is the snake with 2 heads, not Rep. K.
i don’t trust mr v. as far as i could throw him.
War protesters arrested at OBAMA HEADQ
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/....._0103.html
maid-rite!
Thanks Adie, he is listed as one of the worst 10 mayors ever and maybe not being able to be cutthroat enough dooms him. Interesting that he had a mafia hit out on him. He does reflect my positions more closely than any of the candidates. That’s why I find it difficult to understand his Obama decision. I do agree that Iowan’s are more independent than portrayed and most won’t be swayed by the candidates suggestions of who to vote for second.
Don’t get me wrong Adie, I know about Voinivich and his illegal financial dealings. He is far worse than a 2 headed snake.
say they were a “loose coalition” hmmm “loose meat, loose coalition”. Veryyyy interseting.
War protesters arrested at OBAMA HEADQ
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/….._0103.html
says they were a “loose coalition” hmmm “loose meat, loose coalition”. Veryyyy interseting.
oh for the edit function!
Obama coming in second in Iowa should not doom him precisely because he has the independents in NH to look forward to.
I hope that Edwards can win Iowa. The rest of the voters deserve the chance to consider his type of message.
Yep. I remember you asking Jane to make to try that…
Loose meat just sounds suspect. Loose in what way? Deosn’t sound appetizing.
Denial from Richardson’s camp re spinning off the 2nd round support to Obama.
http://www.openleft.com/showCo.....ntId=24139
…Jane to make sure to try that…
Good morning, Jane. Good morning FDL.
I had some weird dreams (nightmares) last night and it was Ron Paul who was the central figure. He kept feeding me, vegetarian, raw red meat that smelled and tasted like strawberries. I ate so much I was sick, repulsed and couldn’t digest it. Hummm! What could all that symbolism mean? Oh yes, in a private meeting it came out he is a diehard NeoCon serving the NeoCon agenda - in my dream, that is. I think I’ve consumed too much caucus.
yep. just sayin’, very few have the courage to march straight and true.
lazy, uninformed voters = big part of the problem
complicity and lack of performance in MSM is well nigh criminal, surely unethical.
[good candidate] has almost no relation to [worthy in office]
yadda yadda yadda *sigh*
I wanted more like Dodd for Christmas, and all I got was this lousy deal with ABC cutting Dodd out of the televised debate. *sniffle*
the swines!
petoye caucus sounds like
I nver tried it, but there was a place in town that served it - maid rite loose meat burgers - they went out of business.
Roseanne Barr used to talk about how delicious they are. IIRC Ms. Barr was in the loose meat biz for a while with her husband at the time Tom Arnold. I think they went out of business. ;)
you’re being unfair to the swine.
go thou, be tough and smart, dawggie
it’s all we got ;->
What a frickin crapshoot. I just contacted 20 voters in rural Iowa and they are on board for Edwards as an underdog. Look for record turnout but be leery of the second choice math, it can bite you on the a##!
This is a very unpredictible event. So much out of the MSM’s control, too much talk, and so little erudition.
Dear Adie@125:
Kissing Rupert Murdoch and FauxNews’ ass isn’t “playing the game of politics”. It’s out and out political whoring, and while there are plenty of male whores in politics, I haven’t seen any OTHER democrats giving right-wing assholes prostate gland massages with their tongues.
THAT little distinction belongs to Clinton.
There’s always been the dilemma that, no matter how wonderful one’s ideals and character, they can’t do a thing unless they get elected. I think Washington may have been the last President that could get get the authority just by showing up. Before they could do anything, both Roosevelt and Lincoln had to be rally good politicians. I’m not sure if I would have liked them as people. Hoover, on the other hand, was supposed to have been a pretty nice guy, helping the displaced and all.
loose meat
sloopy joe without tomato sauce
gak
if I were in Iowa I would have a pork tenderloing sandwich not that loosemeat thing
WaPo0’s The Trail reporting a possible Biden-Obama deal
as a couple of Redd’s (and my) favorite Sesame Street characters has opined:
“Yep, yep, yep, yep, yep….”
I haven’t been to Iowa, so I never officially had one of their loose meat sandwiches, although I do remember that Roseanne bought a loose-meat restaurant. But here’s what I think it is: have you ever tasted hamburger meat as your trying to brown it? Just at the point when you think it’s done, I’ve tasted it and it really is good. Different from a hamburger somehow, and I think that’s what loose-meat sandwiches are about. Kind of a sloppy joe without the sauce and stuff.
Of course, if my concept is wrong entirely, I wish someone would tell me now. I hate the idea of going thru life with completely wrong conceptions of things.
Why not put out a rumor to throw the support of your opponent in your direction. By the time correction is made, the deed is done. The plot twists and turns. The candidate is above the fray and when all is said and done they will have an investigation on who started the rumor - later.
Primaries - the greatest show on earth. The media barkers cry out, “Come to the circus”.
Now that we are late into the thread, can someone tell me what is up with the second choice?
They like those pork tenderloin sandwiches out there too. I had one or two in northwestern Illinois quad cities area(near Iowa). Never tried the loose meat. Try to avoid it.
Great way to get the Obama people to vote for the 1 percenter giving them a higher position thant the other lower candidates. Ahhh, the deals we wheel!
Katharine Graham Cracker and Ann in Az:
Loose meat: sounds about right…the way you both described it.
Stop sugar coating it, and say how you really feel.
Could you compare your canvassing this year as to when howard Dean was running? I would be interested in seeing how much support for Dean evaporated over night or if it was never there. you say everyone you talk to is for Edwards (which would make me very happy), but was heartbroke after Dean lost there. Are the situations any way comparable? Thanks.
well isn’t that lovely.
it’s a matter of style (as you so eloquently demonstrate).
it’s a matter of substance.
ya takes yer choice.
Do NOT. repeat. DO NOT take what i said as an endorsement.
When I see a candidate acting like that, I take it as a sign of weakness and crass, even craven disregard for the job being sought, not to mention the people he/she claims to want to represent.
In my book, it is a solid, HUGE reason NOT to vote for her, or any other candidate who acts that way.
got it? i hope so.
I wish I had some buddies, neighbors, or cousins in Iowa. I don’t know a damn soul there.
YES!
We went to Iowa in the summer od ‘02 to see the Field of Dreams and the Madison county bridges.
And got a souvenir coffee mug from the “Kum ‘n’ Go.” That’s seriously their name.
http://www.costore.com/kumandgo/welcome.asp
maid-rite is not out of business
http://www.maid-rite.com/
You think she’ll tack further to the right if she does poorly in Iowa? That seems like a counterproductive response for her.
random thot # 67.5:
with mad cow disease out there, meat inspection lagging or mostly lacking because of how, like, ya-know, we don’t need guvmnt any more’n we need that bathtub we drownt it in awhile back…
seein’ as how, what with the quality of the carcasses that are chosen for different purposes, from filet mignon on down to -um- bouillon…
well… stuff happens… [read the label if u think i’m kidding]
I make a New Year’s resolution not to buy or consume bouillon any more.
it’s the least i can do, literally…
LOL. I had thought “Toot-N-Totem” was interesting.
arkansas used to have a chain called “The Mad Butcher”.
their radio jingle was “nobody but nobody beats the mad butcher’s meat.”
those crazies who dashed up to the new thread haven’t a clue, have they?!
this is terrific stuff here.
but i gotta go shovel some snow/ice, ick.
carry on dear pups. ;->
GrandmaJ,
I lived in the county where Dean got attacked after the scream. Hurt him badly. No comparable Edwards moment , but I sense MSM has been looking for more to augment the $400 haircut meme.
it ain’t brain surgery…
But he’s ANGRY.
Isn’t that enough to go with a $400 haircut?
(that’s what Tweety said yesterday.)
ANGRY grrrrrrrrrr
Does America want to vote for someone who’s angry?
I hope Obama wins Iowa by a decent margin, and then he’s in good position to attack McCain. McCain is a Bush clone who makes noises about regretting spending, but when you dissect McCain’s policy the Iraq money hemorrhage would not have changed, might have been increased, and would increase as well as the Dover coffin count.
My apologies if I wasn’t clear. I was referring to the Maid-Rite franchise in my town. Roseanne Barr was on teevee a number of years ago touting loose meat burgers. I’m guessing on that one. IIRC, Roseanne was promoting her own loose meat business venture. I’m guessing that she is not pursuing that venture any longer, but not sure about her.
Bush is angry all the time, and compared to Bush Obama would be a sea change. HRC’s facade talks a change, but the result would be a lot of Bush policies continued with the Hill.
really says a lot
I meant to include Edwards as being a sea change as well. He could be a very competent President, but the promises always fly on the primary stump.
Hillary’s support for the Iraq war when the bottom line is in, of course makes Lindsay Graham the driver of the horrendous MCA that the Supreme Court could take a shot at if they have guts in
Boumediene/Al-Odah v. Bush
very happy.
What Graham is really thinking, is that Romney or horrors Rudy 912 would much much rather take on HRC in the general because she is the poster child boggey girl of all time for Rethugs.
The really weird part is that Vilsack thinks that what Lindsay Graham thinks is a selling point to Democrats in a primary. What the hell is he thinking? Is he trying to sink her chances?
Isn’t it great we’ve got a candidate they can’t hardly lay a glove on!
Prof; I think that if she comes third in Iowa, or even 2nd, anything could happen, with her “positioning”. Her campaign will be, at least temporarily, in utter disarray. So will most of the democratic beltway establishment. And the republicans, whatever they say, will be saddened, because if we nominate John Edwards or Barak Obama, it will mean that they have to talk issues, instead of just screaming “Bill Clinton’s Dick!” as Mitt Romney has already begun to do.
To date, she and her staff have been so far removed from the “savvy” that her supporters keep touting, that it’s frightening to think about her as the nominee, to me. John Edward is so much more aware of political realities that it’s laughable to compare them.
Back in 2006, when she lent herself and the dignity of her office as one of NY’s Senators, to FoxNews’ 10th anniversary birthday bash, she knew exactly what she was doing.
When she supported Joe Lieberman against a good antiwar candidate, Ned Lamont, in the Connecticut primary, she knew exactly what she was doing.
When she voted to support the republican bill to make flagburning a federal crime, she knew who she was getting into bed with.
As she supported bush’s “surge” to send more of our troops into what amounts to the world’s largest-ever hostage situation, she and her people HAD to have discussed what that meant.
When she voted for the Kyle-Lieberman amendment, there was no ambiguity about that; she was voting to give bush ANOTHER blank check for another war, in which to enfold the first fuck-up.
Unlike Edwards, she has never apologized for her authorizing vote in 2002. That means one of two things:
She is so stupid that she believes that the invasion and occupation of Iraq will turn out to be “good” for us and for the Iraqis and the region, and so stupid that she doesn’t understand the realities of what bush (with her help) has created in Iraq.
Or, she’s so afraid of admitting just HOW wrong she was, now that a million people have died, and with the meter running at that $3 billion a week, AND COUNTING, that she thinks it will ruin her if she cops to the reality of what she helped gin up.
In that last one, she’s right: It’s now too late for a real mea-culpa. If she does it under the pressure of a loss in Iowa, and then starts to try to correct the huge mistake of selling out the progressive wing of the democratic party, by moving back to the left, the same progressives who have been hammering her in the straw votes on progressive blogs, will surely scorn her for the political chameleon which she is.
Three groups of voters are going to decide this election:
moderate republicans.
Independents.
and conservative democrats.
There are enough people in all three categories who are honest enough to admit what a disaster bush’s presidency has been, and who are angry enough about it, to vote for a democrat in huge numbers.
But not if her name is Hillary Clinton. If we nominate her, the built-in advantage that we have in this election will evaporate, as the MSM helps the GOP make Hillary the issue, instead of Iraq, or the economy, or immigration, or whatever. It will be all Hillary; all the time, and the center of the country will largely join the right, to vote against her; and the possibility of a democratic win of historic proportions will gang a’gleying.
If she had stuck with the people who are her natural constituents, and if she had had the courage to name bush’s miserable war for what it is, then I would have supported her with the same joy and enthusiasm which I felt when she was elected to the senate.
I, personally, have never felt more betrayed by a politician in all the years I’ve been a liberal democrat. If we don’t vote to send her back to the Senate where she belongs, she will be a disaster for us. I think the republicans will keep the white house, retake the Senate, and probably, retake the house.
If that happens, it will be the 8 ball in the side pocket, and this corporate 4th Reich that we progressives have been fighting against will be permenantly enshrined as “the amurkan dream”. They will use their media, their lobbyists, and their money, to win elections, to pass legislation, and to select judges who will sustain and codify their agenda.
It’s simple: one of the political parties is going to come out of this election mortally wounded. If we nominate Hillary Clinton, it will very likely be ours.
I think for Hillary, overall having Vilsack and his wife show up for so many events had been hoped to be a big magnet. Tom Harkin, the local Senator did very well, winning by a mile when he ran.
As you say, Lindsay Graham has been a very avid Bush soldier on every vote.
Don’t forget at the Iowa caucuses on the Democratic side only that the second teir people who don’t make 15% of the vote, then have choices to make about giving their support on the second round. And votes in some caucuses count more than others based on seniority.
Guide to Arcane Democratic Party Caucus Rules
After the number of eligible caucus attendees has been determined, the viabilitythreshold is calculated based on the number of delegates the caucus is to elect.
Note: When calculating viability, always round UP to the next whole number.a. In caucuses that elect two
(2) delegates, preference groups must contain atleast 25% of the caucus attendees in order to be viable. This can becalculated by using the following formula:Number of Eligible Caucus Attendees x 0.25 = Viability Thresholdb. In caucuses that elect three
(3) delegates, the total caucus attendees shouldbe divided by six (6) to determine the viability threshold. This can becalculated by using the following formula:Number of Eligible Caucus Attendees ÷ 6 = Viability Thresholdc. In caucuses that elect four
(4) or more delegates, preference groups mustcontain at least 15% of the caucus attendees in order to be viable. This canbe calculated by using the following formula:Number of Eligible Caucus Attendees x 0.15 = Viability Threshold15)Once the viability threshold has been determined, the Chair will announce thatnumber to the caucus.Note: The viability threshold remains unchanged throughout the course of thecaucus, even if attendees leave before delegates are awarded.