While my friend DeDurkheim played the honorable role of researcher/ journalist at my precinct, I actually participated in the wild, woolly, but mostly cramped and sweaty world of caucusing. I’ve generally avoided endorsing anybody, though I’ve written some about wanting to avoid at least the appearance, if not the reality of an American Oligarchy. So with 223 of my newest close personal friends we crammed into a space capable of holding about 180 and I caucused for Obama. It was a tough call between Obama and Edwards. As ever, despite the fact it was very, very, cramped and many must have felt claustrophobic, every person, no matter who they supported, was very cool. We’re a polite lot here in Iowa.
The vote count in my precinct was similar to what the rest of the state did and as Jane said below, the way delegates, not votes, are counted on the Democratic side under reports how Obama actually did on the pure number of persons voting.
Also, while my precinct had 224 Democratic voters, DeDurkheim was working on the GOP as well and found that only slightly more than 60 had shown up for the GOP caucus, where Huckabee prevailed. Throughout Iowa this pattern continued, where Democrats had a 2 to 1 attendance edge, even though the GOP also set a record for turnout. In fact, Hubris Sonic at the Group News Blog shows the dimension of the Democratic Victory on that score:
Total Voter Turnout (approximate)
356,000Percentage of total vote
24.5% Obama
20.5% Edwards
19.8% Clinton
11.4% Huckabee (R)
After that it was off to the amazing, and disappointingly dull, media center. Perhaps the Polk County Convention Center knows too well how to do this because with the results coming in, everything there seemed quite staid.
So we went to the Hy-Vee Convention center to the beating of drums, or perhaps it was the sound of Joe Klein wanking? It was really loud, but not unpleasant, so it must have been the former. Obama showed up to speak before a crowd that was as keyed up as any I’ve seen at a political event. And boy did Obama deliver, with a tremendous speech that hit all the right notes. When I saw it later it played even better on television. The hall was electric, and that was just when Joe Klein left, imagine what it was like when Obama was speaking.
Related posts:
- Obama Meeting with Progressives and Caucus Leaders Focused on Triggers, Opt-Out
- Frank Luntz Offers Bait to the Narcissist Caucus on Health Care Reform
- Diane Watson’s Progressive Caucus Whip Operation AWOL on Public Plan
- Thailand Refuses to Extradite Viktor Bout
- The Baucus Caucus: PhRMA, Insurance, Hospitals and Rahm
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Since you caucused for Obama we can now discount your remarks because you are obviously an Obama supporter.
Good very early morning, Attaturk! Interesting account. Do you have any sense how many R’s showed up in your caucus and re-registered as D’s in order to caucus for a D candidate this time?
Gaging, Caging, Caging!!!!!! The gooper mantra! This might just get very nasty. Very nasty!
Good Morning Attaturk
Huckabee’s giving his winner speech on CSPAN right now, just started
Preacher + Politician = Problems…
And so the black male clinton “won” the politics as usual caucus. On to NH now where real voting takes place and where lieberman’s acolyte will not do very well. Corporate whores of any stripe are still corporate whores a “victory” for big pharma and big insurance is not a victory for change.
Huckabee from the pulpit:
When he said this it gave me the chills, but not in a good way, more in a going down the back of my spine way.
Obama’s up now, I heard it was a great speech
I suppose this is as good a place as any to ask about this. I’ve not supported any one person yet, though I lean towards Edwards (full disclosure). I have an issue with Obama that I’ve not seen many blogs discuss much, and that’s judgment.
Obama supported Joe Lieberman right up until the 11th hour, and picked him as his Senate mentor, didn’t he? Doesn’t that show critical (horrible) judgment for a future president? Or maybe it just doesn’t mean much now, but it means a lot to me. It makes it really difficult to support him. I’m open to being convinced that I’m wrong.
Morning Joe (Scarborough) starts the day showing the inherent corporatist bent of the MSM welcoming fellow cohort Pat Buchanan: “…Pat thank you for being with us. you did a great job last night, I thought your work on the panel was great, you were the guy that called it right. of course you had a couple of people with you that I think were members of Hugo Chavez’s cabinet”.
(Man, and to think I thought the Late Late crowd was tough!)
do not confuse bobblehead’s “politics” with his “experience.” Obama can learn from bobblehead Joe’s experience and distance himself from Joe in the process!
I’m sorry that Bird Flu is in Northern Israel. I hope Israel is much better prepared than the US Government, which has no coherent plan, or individual states who are stupidly spending millions on Tamiflu when the New England Journal and JAMA and the rest of the infectious disease literature are replete with reports of resistance from oral medications (4 approved in the US that have nothing whatsoever to do with treating H5N1 variants.
I have already heard this buzz on some threads about Rove/Gillespie salivating yada yada and yada. I have this to say to anyone promoting that:
Please, please outline what you know to be their attack points. Because I can think of dozens of ways to attack this current administration, their Congress, Romney, Huckaby, and delightfully that fumbling screwup Rudy 912.
Corporate America can go choke on a hard boiled egg…
I have just one question. Does Pat Buchanan live in the MSNBC studios and is he catheterized? I always thought he had a home in Virginia bordering on CIA’s campus, and his wife had to constantly chase after the cat when the cat wandered over to the CIA (and I won’t make any puns).
On what do you base that extraordinary statement?
Obama is owned by the corporate empire, does not support universal health care, wants to keep us in Iraq for at least two years, wants to nuke Pakistan. He has already learned from the liar from CT but distance himself?
To the extent that anyone continues to mention Leiberman instead of the issues and dynamics of the remaning primary and caucuses, with all respect due, I really believe you’re so wasting your time.
Bashing Obama with Leiberman is just a non-issue. It has no legs, and it sure as hell is not going to fly.
I wasn’t able to get into FDL last night because this place was obvious on fire and very, very busy, but now that I can I just want to say to the Democrats of Iowa, “WOW!!!!!!!”. They completely stunned me in a good way, because I really thought they were going to choose Edwards as the safe bet. Boy, was I wrong! I think last night was a testament to where Iowans have been and where they want to go now.
Onto New Hampshire…..this state went VERY BLUE in 2006 and I have a feeling the Democrats of this state could also go for Obama.
Because Kucinich chose Obama, I am rethinking Obama. I’m honestly not happy with the top 3 Democratic candidates but if Kucinich has a GOOD reason as to why he chose Obama, I may lean towards him now.
What a night. Obama’s speech last night was historic. I felt the same way last night the night the Red Sox’s won the World Series in 2004…there was a lunar eclipse that night and the whole entire night just felt historic and meant to be. Wow.
Now see? You’re turning me away from Obama for the reasons I’ve had for awhile now! LOL
I’m still shaking my head about Kucinich choosing Obama. Why not Dodd?
Ataturk– Nice that you like Obama. He’s a good man, a smooth man, a polished man. But he don’t have the balls to go against The Man – the Insurance Man, the Big Pharma Man, the WALL STREET Man — Obama is still the suck-up man to the Money Party.
Until you support a man who has his own riches, his own freedom, you will be supporting a bought man (Hillary or Obama). Nobody supports the poor or the middle class of America like John Edwards.
VOTE FOR JOHN EDWARDS FOR PRESIDENT!
Oherwise, be nice and vote for Obama the Tool or Hillary the Bitch. Either way, you lose the general American vote.
Sad to say, but truth be told, John Edwards is the most electable Democrat. He’s also the best.
OT as usual.
Shorter Busharraf: She was asking for it.
Kay– I’m not sure to what extent that the people who couldn’t get 15% in the convoluted caucus rules were able to direct their voters to other candidates like Obama, but I want to give you some stats to look over. Many cynics will be quick to point out that no one who has won Iowa has gone on to win the general. While I respect history, I don’t think that flies in this case at all.
Check out these:
IOWA BY THE NUMBERS
Here’s the lineup for
WASHINGTON JOURNAL
Friday, January 4
7am – Newspaper Articles & Phones
7:30am – James Lynch, Cedar Rapids Gazette (Iowa), Chief Political Writer
8am – James Pindell, Boston Globe, New Hampshire Political Correspondent | Blog
8:30am – Bill Adair, PolitiFact, Editor
9:30am – Newspaper Articles & Phones
special phone line for caucus goers
owned by corporate…..does not support universl healthcare….Iraq two more years, and Nuke Pakistan….????
Based on what? Please…. He knows the difference between “mandated” Healthcare, and the “cost” of Healthcare.
Takes time yo get out of “Iraq.”
Nuke Pakistan? Now who is talking crazy!! “Actionalble Intelligence,” to take out AQ and Bin Lauden in Pakistan!!! You bet! No nukes needed! You have a problem with that??
I beg to differ. Obama/Edwards has a nice ring to it though. Edwards would accept a vice-presidency ticket.
And of course Iowa is way too early to predict the general.
With all due respect, I beg to differ. What substantive basis due you have to assess whether Obama “has the balls” to go against the pharmaceutical comapanies or insurance companies. None of your dems in Congress has done that substantively yet.
I understand that Edwards has used that as his mantra, and Edwards is a very competent man and would make I believe, a very competent President.
But I don’t understand how you can begin to haulf off and say Obama wouldn’t take them on. How do you butress that?
Iowa is right next door to obama’s home state. A lot of his supporters are students going to college in Iowa but eligible to attend and support him under the caucus system. That is not going to help him here in NH.
The idea that obama represents “change” is too laughable for words unless one likes the idea of a new face as a spokesperson for big bidness.
Pete I agree. And in that vein Rachel Madow commented last night that Obama has a quality like Bush in that he can coax the middle and run on a seemingly centrist platform yet steer the country hard left.
I have just one question. Does Pat Buchanan live in the MSNBC studios and is he catheterized?
Answers: yes – and ewww! The guy is on all day, every day. I wonder when/if he sleeps. Personally, I think that he’s been spewing the same stuff for soooo long now that he can do 3/4 of these interviews while totally asleep on his, er… feet.
Thanks Pete. I appreciate the link. Last night was a stunner! Has Iowa set the pace for the rest of the nation? Not sure, but it certainly would be incredible to say the least.
Probably just another one of my many blind spots, but I don’t see how the question of whether to consider whether Rove et al. could have some nefarious plan under way depends in any way upon knowing, in advance and with specificity, what the details of that plan might be. Expressing curiosity about it is not the same as opposing Obama.
Gotta go try to sleep in this windstorm now, so I’ll look forward to catching up with this thread in the morning.
Also this was in Edwards’ blood. He was a trial lawyer and some of his cases were write out of Grissom or Erin Brockovitch.
Obama did Harvard law and did it well. He can take those big enterprises on, but it doesn’t matter who comes after them as President, as long as Congress lacks a spine, and it does, and as long as there are lobbying loopholes as the NYT describes this morning, I don’t care who is President, you’re going no where with the pharmaceutical companies and the insurance companies, and the medical care problems, as I know you understand are far more complex than what Dr. Frist did to the American people in selling out to them with former Senator Democrat John Berlinger Breaux as chief lobbyist for the pharmaceutical companies with a multimillion dollar salary, working with lobbyist for Washington, DC, firm Patton Boggs LLP
I love Iowa! I truly respect New Hamphire! Neither of these diddly-squat states represents the rest of America in any way.
The sooner we get rid of this insane electoral college, the better off America will be. For instance, California (not only is it the most populous, but the most diverse state in the nation) should probably select the nominees and then let the rest of the states vote in the general election. That would probably be the fairest way to do things. Don’t you think?
And did I mention that David Brooks,
who I refuse to link to, is still a d*rk?
From Karl Rove’s colon to David Brooks’ word processor:
Good morning, pups. It’s Bobo and Krugman today. Bobo felt the earth move. He says he’s been through election nights that brought a political earthquake to the country, but he’s never been through an election night that brought two. It’s fun watching him try to put a happy face on Huckabee’s win. Mr. Krugman is looking forward to 2009. He says it’s a very good bet that the biggest foreign policy issues for the next president will involve the Far East rather than the Middle East.
http://mgpaquin.wordpress.com/
The coffee, tea and hot chocolate are ready, and I’ve got banana bread that just emerged from the oven. It’s 24° here, but we’re hoping for slightly warmer weather by next week. Have a great day.
Mandated means that everyone is in the pool. Opt out means that the pool is narrowed and the expense is increased. It is the ideal plan for the insurance companies.
Nope. It takes balls. Damn the oil companies.
It was not me that said it it was obama. As for the ghost under the bed forget Osama ben Laden… get the real terrorists BIG BUSINESS
That, Kay is the question. You’ll see a lot of cynics and there is a long way to go, but since Obama is my man and Edwards is my man for his VP, I’m very happy.
To the people who say Rove and Gillespie are sharpening up the attack I say, please bring it on, because my doggie can attack Bush, Rove, and Gillespie, Rudy, and Romney (Huck won’t be there) on their horrific record of not keeping thousands safe before 911 or after.
Bananna bread is very good. That much I’m sure of.
Well, that and the fact that Bobo is a dork…
Edwards already in N.H., speaking to what apears to be a decent-sized crowd. Looks a little tired, and voice sounds a bit sketchy. But – damn, that guy *has* some energy. Coming so soon after his recent 36 hour all-nighter in Iowa, I just wonder how he does it.
otoh, it looks like everybody is already in N.H. It’s hard to really like most politicians, but damn, them’s some hard-working people! (at least during campaigns).
2-1 dem turnout is a great start to a day that is 17 and feels like 5. It will Irish Oatmeal and some strange gift fruit from Florida for breakfast. Banana bread would make a nice addition. Wish we could swap.
Obama/Edwards does have a nice ring to it. Or Edwards as AG enforcing the labor laws and any freeging laws at this point would be nice.
An Obama/Edwards ticket would make a majority of the party happy, no? I’m going to write to Kucinich’s campaign today to find out what it is about Obama that he thinks is good for America. I’m one who has had a hard time with the top 3 Democratic candidates, but I respect Kucinich and his opinions, so I’m hoping he (or his staff) gives me a very good reason as to why I should jump on this bandwagon.
Radlib1, I see your point about California being the main state to elect the candidates for us. I don’t agree with that. What about having a national caucus day where all states are involved on the same day? To me, that would be the most fair…a big headache…but fair.
Why would a national caucus day/primary day be any more of a headache than a national election day?
Repub dirty tricks.
Can we get specific here about Rove and Gillespie? This is a researching thread read by congressional staffer. What’s said here does not definitely not stay here but really goes places. On the subject of nefariousness, remember we do not have a working FEC although with Hans von S. nomination dead, we should have one soon. Remember too, he’s gonozo not for his past misdeeds, alas, but because of Obama’s pocket veto. He does have that much Dodd in him.
Anyone know if anything happened to the Kansas Repub. Party Chair who boasted in printed about successful caging? Remembering that IIRC the cease and desist only extends to the national party, although caging is illegal everywhere.
And to end on a high note. EW convinced me late last nite that Romney pretty badly busted on the Push-pull NH thing that the NH AG is investigating. see her quick analysis thread.
And now to meet the deadline that di not get met last nite for obvious reasons.
I think the way it works is if you get less than 15% you’re not “viable” and out. Then there’s another round of voting with only the candidates who achieved “viability” (and undecided). Dodd probably wasn’t around for the second most of the time so he couldn’t send his voters to Dodd. Dodd was usually in the samwe position as Kucinich – out of te running.
I think.
It’s one state, and this what really pisses me off about this whole process. There are 49 other states in the union, yet how little do we have to say. To me this is not what a democracy is about.
DK believed the MSM that HRC was the leader and his move to BO was “anybody but HRC”. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
As for California why should they, the biggest state, have any hope of learning anything about the candidates except that which would get from MSM? In IA and NH we are attuned to retail politics. We meet every candidate, we ask questions and get answers (or rhetoric in the case of HRC and BO) but we are experienced with ignoring MSM and those stupid polls. California? They have more interest in Letterman, Leno et al, vacuous is the word that comes to mind.
Obama victory speech:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v…..ommunity/p
I have been reading Brooksie and the NYT religiously for years. While it has had its lapses and mistakes in judgement, I still enjoy it immensely.
As I always say, (I know David Brooks is hated by the firepuppies Marion), and I always have winced at his logic and grinned at his faulty rationaliztions in his columns–but I like his travel books.
I’d rather replace Brooks with Charley Savage if I were Bill Keller or Brooks’ boss Andrew Rosenthal, running the Times Op Ed page, but I have also been thinking of Russ Feingold or Chris Dodd for Attorney General of the United States, and am trying to figure out how I can make that happen.
I guess it really wouldn’t be if you think about it. I was figuring two national elections in one year would put some over the edge. Not me. I’d be happy to do it that way.
Maine caucuses in February, but by the time we roll around our votes don’t have as much of an impact as the first few. I love the idea of the whole country caucusing in one day.
Kay I’m afraid part of it is this.
Kucinich is ideologically closer to Edwards, but it was caught on tape that Edwards whispered to Hillary at one of the early debates that Kusinich didn’t have a chance.
That is one component of Dennis’ support for Barak now.
New Hampshire definitely takes this seriously. I love that.
Beeffart Liberal, I knew Kucinich didn’t have a chance, but that didn’t stop me from supporting him. Who knows…maybe the people of Maine will choose him in February. I wouldn’t put it past us! LOL We’re crazy up here. ;-)
Why would a national caucus day/primary day be any more of a headache than a national election day?
I’m for it. I would very much like, at least one time before I die, to cast a meaningful vote in a presidential race.
I’m still shaking my head about Kucinich choosing Obama. Why not Dodd?
Two sub-eligibles (K+D) wouldn’t add up to one eligible. Kucinich figured his committed voters would probably choose their idea of a Magic Negro over the Dread Pirate Hilary or the Suspiciously Successful Edwards. Now Dennis gets to brag that it was his troops “gave” Obama his Big Iowa Win, which increases Kucinich’s own importance in future primaries from sub-nothing to statistically-irrelevant, but his Kookie for Teh Kuc troops get their all-important warm fuzzies.
Not only is my charisma button disabled, but I found last night that I distrust charisma. Think it substitues for content. I did not like the speech.
That point was made by someone here yesterday. It could be the reason. If so, can someone give a good reason to support Obama at this time! Thank you. ;-)
It’s just sad about Edwards. The MSM story – with alot of them – is “Edwards had to win. He didn’t. He’s out. We can ignore him.” I think that’s bogus ’cause it doesn’t at all take account of how close Edwards came and that he beat Clinton. The (pretty) close second that he put up is, in a sense, a win and I think should be treated as such. Obviously Obama’s the story, but to just write-off Edwards like they’re doing is wrong and pisses me off. If he had gotten in the teens or maybe even low 20’s, then yes, it would be a loss and I could accept this storyline easier. But in what was clearly going to be a very close 3 way race – they knew that ahead of time – to say any of them HAD to win is wrong.
It wouldn’t make me happy. I’m voting for whoever the democratic candidate is because I value the Supreme Court.
And I agree with eCAHN @ 55 about charisma.
That is a terrific idea. Talk about kicking ass and taking names. Edwards as Attorney General.
If Edwards were a powerful VP, as Cheney has been, but in a constructive way, that could be very attractive as well.
cuz we got more innertubes than any other state ???
is this multipule choice, cuz I wanna nutter question …
Ouch. Nice summation of what happened! Kucinich to me seems so principled that I was shocked when he chose Obama and not someone like Dodd. But hey! Last night was historic and I don’t want to take from that. I’m moving forward now and rethinking everything. *turning leaf over*
And truly terrible coverage in the Washington
Anyone But EdwardsPost.The lede for the Republican caucuses mentions the first and second place finishers,
while on the Democratic side it mentions the first and third. John who?
Maybe it’s a Jersey mindset, but I agree 100%. And while we’re hearing about the great turnout for a caucus, it’s only a fraction of the people who will vote in a general. You can really say the same thing about NH. The system stinks.
Gotta go to work. Have a great day everyone!
It was same with the NYT last night. haven’t checked this a.m. but the line was “Edwards was a disappointing second because he bet everything on winning Iowa.”
The MSM story – with a lot of them – is “Edwards had to win. He didn’t. He’s out.
Story this morning sounds a little different, anyway. Now it’s “He has to win H.H. to stay in”. Or maybe it was “He has to beat Hillary again to stay in”.
It was one of those. It’s early, and I’m not nearly awake…
If you value the S. Ct. I hope you’ll understand that one of the most hurtful blows that Senate Judiciary Democrats with the exception of Feingold and Kennedy dealt to the Supreme Court were Roberts and Allito.
And the passive, spineless, Democrats in Congress have allowed the federal appellate bench to continue to become loaded with Federalist groupies–although much of that was rammed through by the Repubican controlled Judiciary Committee 10-9. Dems have been asleep at the switch and here’s how bad the federal judiciary has been stacked for the next thirty years:
Bush and Compliant Democrats Give Conservatives a 60-40% Majority on the Federal Appellate Bench
Conservative courts likely to be Bush legacy
January 2, 2008 :: David G. Savage :: Los Angeles Times
Leahy’s definition of “progress” is absurd.
Here’s the NYT:
The result left uncertain the prospects for John Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina, who had staked his second bid for the White House on winning Iowa.
that’s about it. Um, aren’t everybody’s propspects uuncertain at this point. Dumb remark by NYT.
morning everyone.
thanks for the report from your caucus, attaturk. glad to hear that you-all kept your head… i don’t think the same can be said for the rest of the country. pretty early on i decided to turn the tv off and even stayed away (mostly) from the toobz.
reading some of yesterday’s posts now… and even the comments in this thread gives me a headache. i just don’t find increasingly strong assertions that one or another candidate is the only good one (or is horrible) at all convincing or helpful. just makes me hate primary season.
sorry for being all curmudgeon-like this morning. i guess i still am just not enthusiastic about the process or our choices.
It certainly does show that MSM (big bidness) is still worried about Edwards, about BO not so much.
Me, I am sending Edwards another cheque this morning and I am hosting one of his campaign workers and I will be making phone calls for him during the next few days. If MSM does not want him that’s a good enough reason for me to support him.
Believe me, there are hundreds of highly paid people working for both the RNC and the DNC crafing attacks BSRH.
Hans von Spakovsky for the F.E.C. is hardly dead.
From
Congressional Crackdown on Lobbying Is Already Showing Cracks NYT Jan. 3, 2007
This article in Nation is edifying.
http://www.thenation.com/blogs…..pid=265664
LOL Selise,
I understand your pain, and have probably unintentionally been part of it, and the foreplay now for the General Election is incredibly long, but if not sooner, it’d be later wouldn’t it?
I guess you mean all the presumptions and suger plums dancing in our heads this early on with so much of the field left to plow.
Mitch the bitch says he is not dead and that is your reasoning?
The following is a public service announcement:
Mary Matalin will be on JoeScar later this morning. Keep the remote handy, put on dark sunglasses, whatever it takes. Extra protection for the eyes, ears, and your teevee set are recommended.
As you know, in politics, while substance is prime, charisma is very necessary.
I believe you will see exponentially more substance from Obama and Edwards than what’s on the other side and I now that didn’t take more than an IQ of 2 for me to realize.
By the way, do you have a candidate you’ve chosen yet?
The President gets to select the nominee for the Supreme Court, and that’s why it matters to me. Any choice by a Democrat would be far superior to what a Republican would make. I agree the Democrats were spineless in their actions with Roberts and Alito.
Garlic around the neck?
Bring her on. Her husband has to be laughing hard at her and relishing the months to come.
Unfortunately, the mainstream American media doesn’t want to come to grips with the central Edwards’ point — it’s the people that matter! Whether we are talking about a universal health care plan or employment for all who can work, John Edwards represents the best of America.
He may have to fight with Republicans (and Democrats) to achieve it, but he’s willing to fight (unlike the Clintons and the Obamas). Face it, Hillary and Obama are already bought off by the Money Party (Wall Street, Big Insurance, Big Pharma). They can talk all the shit they want, but they are bought and paid for by Corporate America. No two ways about it.
John Edwards, on the other hand, has always fought (and litigated) against big corporations. He has fought for the “little people.”
Now’s the time to let him fight for us, for the rest of America.
Who did you think the first serious African-American candidate would be, Huey P. Newton?
Unfortunately, mainstream America doesn’t want to come to grips with the Edwards’
Garlic around the neck?
Whatever it takes, But for god’s sake – take precautions. Think of the children, the grandchildren…
And if one happens to be a hetero male, if you *ever* want to have sex again, do *not* gaze upon the “face” of Mary Matalin!
That is all.
My comment was personal, not related to what it took to be a success in politics. I’m almost always out of step with everyone else, so you, as an Obama supporter, should take heart that I don’t like him.
It is my general observation that campaigns become less substantive as time passes, so I’ll be very surprised if I see more of that in Obama.
I dislike his “let’s all get along” meme intensely. ‘Scuse the too extreme analogy, but it’s early and I can’t think of a better one for now. The R-business establishment is very dangerous. Getting along with them is like getting along with Hitler. (There I’ve said it & lost the arguement, sigh.) You need to fight against them, not get along with them.
As I’ve said before, Obama would probably appoint a Supreme who would vote with the conservative majority in the interest of bipartisanship.
I think Edwards would be in a better position if he wasn’t on the losing ticket in ‘04. I think a lot of people write him off because of that. After all it was a real bad campaign with a real bad candidate at the top of the ticket.
“sorry for being all curmudgeon-like this morning. i guess i still am just not enthusiastic about the process or our choices”
No worries mate, don’t be sorry. At least once a day I become almost suicidal in the overwhelming realization that the path we humans are on is becoming exponentially a non-sustainable dead end.
haha. no – you should do your thing, for those of you who are enjoying this primary, it is your time. go for it.
“And despite the Republicans’ loss of control of the Senate, 40 of Bush’s judges won confirmation this year, more than in the previous three years when Republicans held the majority.”
I have heard somewhere that the President selects the Supreme Court nominee, but if you check the history of the Supreme court, many nominees did not get confirmed by Senate Judiciary. See that’s the consent part in the phrase “Advise and Consent.”
But if you check out the wusses on the Democratic side and what they allowed to happen we have Alito and Roberts, with Kennedy a Conservative swinger, and Scalia and Thomas with many years left.
What Democrats have had a major roll in is this:
Bush has successfully put 294 judges on the federal courts, a 60:40 Edge in Federalist Society Nudniks:
WASHINGTON — After nearly seven years in the White House, President Bush has named 294 judges to the federal courts, giving Republican appointees a solid majority of the seats, including a 60%-to-40% edge over Democrats on the influential U.S. appeals courts.
The rightward shift on the federal bench is likely to prove a lasting legacy of the Bush presidency, since many of these judges — including his two Supreme Court appointees — may serve for two more decades.
And despite the Republicans’ loss of control of the Senate, 40 of Bush’s judges won confirmation this year, more than in the previous three years when Republicans held the majority.
yes. and i’m completely serious. would just add that our apparent mad dash over the cliff seems to be speeding up.
was hoping to see some signs of a new direction in 2009. just don’t seeing it, and that has me a big freaked.
Scarecrow’s upstairscrow
A Democrat would’ve never selected Roberts or Alito to be a nominee. And that is what my point is.
ack – my typing is even worse than usual this morning. the last sentence was supposed to be:
…or something like that
yes.
but such a low bar.
And you think I’m not serious?
Following your own drummer is healthy and that’s fine. I wasn’t being confrontational, though. I was sincerely interested given your background who you like given the choices.
I wholehartedly share your view of the business establishment. 1000% and unfortunately as you know well, handlers posture candidates. It’s an insincerety I know you hate, and I share your assessment.
We absolutely cannot afford another conservative block on the Supreme Court. Take a look at my link to the appellate bench stacking that Bush has gotten away with facilitated by the dysfunctional Democrats on Senate Judiciary–40 very Hitleresque judges. I know the backgrounds and cases of these people. And some of them have ridiculous backgrounds. One was moved from California where she never litigated a nanosecond in a federal courtroom from a California state court to the frigging D.C. Circuit–Janet Rodgers Brown.
The SJC confirmed her Nov. 6,2006 by a party line vote, when they had the 10-9 majority, but
And eCAHNomics, guess who helped get her there?
A Democrat. She isn’t qualified to umpire a little league game. She’s the most bigoted right wing non-separation of church and state individual on the planet.
Question: On the Nomination (Confirmation Janice R. Brown, of California, to be U.S. Circuit Judge )
Nelson (D-NE)
i thought probably, but did not know.
KayInMaine — Sorry I missed your comment before. I actually was saying it more “tongue-in-cheek” that California should make the nominations (since it is undoubtedly the most diverse and populous state in the nation). However, now that I’ve said it, I do think that California is more “representative” of the rest of the nation than either Iowa or New Hamphire. As a matter of fact, we may have more ex-Iowans here in California than there are in Iowa.
But something happens when people get to California — they either become more idealistic or more Democratic when they get here. Maybe that’s only because the people who migrate to California are more optimistic about their futures.
Whatever, I don’t really mean to suggest that California be the sole nominator of our our politicians (although Iowa and New Hampshire are pretty damn homogenous). But I really do, seriously, think that we should get away from the ancient Constitutional mistake of the electoral colllege. The President of the United States should be elected by the popular majority of all of its citizens (and Wyoming should not have more votes in the process than California — sorry, Mr. Cheney, but live with it ).
Let Democracy Flourish! Majority Rules! Everywhere!
(Especially in Florida and Ohio)! Let’s be Honest as well as wise.
Once Bush got in the Oval courtesy of O’Conner, the slaughter of the federal bench was on. And Democrats helped him get Roberts onto the Supreme Court when they could have tried to blick him.
I have news for you. Democrats helped Roberts get to the floor of the Senate. .
Only 5 Dems blocked Roberts on SJC–they were passive in questioning him as well. Leahy was pathetic.
That’s my point, and the point of a lot of us who watch the appellate circuits and the S. Ct. very closely.
Senate Vote on Alito
4 Dems voted for Alito on the floor of the Senate.
Byrd (D-WV)
Conrad (D-ND)
Johnson (D-SD)
Nelson (D-NE)
It’s not just the S. Ct. The federal appellate appointments that Bush got through, 40 with this Congress with “Dems” in the majority but certainly not in any way shape or form in control are huge.
240 right winged judges are what Bush has gotten onto the federal courts this minute, and that’s damn significant. It’s considerably more than Clinton got to appoint.
On appointing judges, I suspect that Edwards would be better than either O or H.
They’re writing off Edwards because they’re scared. Were before Iowa, still are – and with reason, I think.
‘The lede for the Republican caucuses mentions the first and second place finishers,
while on the Democratic side it mentions the first and third. John who?’
Not an accident I think.
The best coverage last night was CSPAN – No talking heads, no commercials. Just folks working the caucas. I really got a sense of what it was like without anybody giving me play-by-play. Imagine that!
You guys do know Scarecrow’s upstairs, right?
So the repugnantklan had a record turn out but NOBODY voted in the repug caucuses? Gee, think maybe they regestered at the door and voted for obamalamadingdong?
At the caucus last night I was proud of the spirit of unity of the Dems despite differences in opinion about candidates. The focus groups were sharing cookies and jokes and there was definitely a celebratory aspect to the whole evening. There was even cooperation to make the almost viable groups viable. That’s because we like and respect most of our candidates (not so for the Republicans, eh?). It was evident that every Democrat there is concerned about what is happening to America right now and that there is a fierce determination to unite behind our eventual nominee to take our country back and set a positive course for a future that isn’t based on fear and greed.
I think that the Hillary camp made the same mistakes Dean made in ‘04 in Iowa — she overestimated support with no real reason to do so. For instance, in the days leading up to caucus I received many phone calls from the Hillary campaign that acted like I’d committed to caucusing for them (I was never *asked* if I was a supporter). Several friends of mine who had no intentions of supporting Clinton received supporter materials in the mail (like the pre-printed name tags she distributed to supposedly committed caucusers). Before the caucus I predicted in my personal blog that Obama would take Iowa by a pretty big margin and that Clinton’s numbers would be way below what she thought they’d be, and that ended up being true.
As far as keeping track of voter changes, basically you either go to the table for registered dems or go fill out forms. My husband is (was) a registered independent who changed his registration to caucus for Edwards. With more money and organization, it would be great for Iowa to keep track of that kind of info, but these are locally organized affairs run by a small handful of people in sometimes really strange locations. When I signed in, I received a high tech “post it” that I carried to another table where I got an index card with a hand-written number on it (that’s how they kept track of the # of caucusers). That index card was my ticket to being counted in my preference group. Fancy stuff. So keeping track of statistics like # of voters registered, etc, would require a lot more support I think.
The huge turnout was because people want change. All three of the frontrunners talk about change but the Iowans decided that Obama is the one who will bring about the change that they want.
Hillary supporters seem to be having a hard time with the concept that their candidate is not a shoe-in for the nomination.
Edwards supporters seem kind of angry that if Iowans were not going to vote for the shoe-in candidate, they picked Obama instead of Edwards.
I am a Biden supporter so I don’t have a dog in the fight and have long gotten over any anger at people who don’t see that my candidate as the best one.
Obama generates energy, he brought in the youth vote, he won over independents, he’s loaded with the charisma needed to win in a general election. I would feel just fine if he wins in NH and SC and the other 47 states too.