Democratic primaries will be held Wednesday our time in Oregon and Kentucky, which will respectively choose 52 and 51 delegates. Below is another race associated with the latter state, which this year ended with runner-up Eight Belles having to be put down*. Does the knackers’ yard beckon for a certain second-placed Democratic nag? Discuss.
* Unfortunately for my metaphor, Clinton in fact holds a handy 30.5 per cent lead in Kentucky, according to Real Clear Politics. Obama however leads by 12.4 per cent in Oregon.
love that delegate count
Anyone who would like an adult discussion about Obama and US economics, bookmark this:
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21491
and this:
http://www.salon.com/tech/htww/2008/05/23/obamanomics_redux/
…for starters. Maybe in the morning, it’s not light reading.
Andrew – now I have, thanks! I suppose I see it so often on here it didn’t register. That speaks volumes as to the way Dowd sees it doesn’t it? Unless it was a sub-editor.
FINNS , for the forensic records
Kirribilli Removals #1995
Ron #1971“fiscal monetary & regularatory policy be based on”
k/r “There is something called Fiscal Policy, which is what governments do with budgets and tax policy, and there is Monetary Policy which is what Central banks do with things like interest rates.
Regulation of the financial system is a very broad term and encompasses a lot of how government responds to moderate the behaviour of financial systems.”
Ron: The full question was “What in detail is Obama’s intelelctual agenda , whose model is it based on and which economists theory is Obama’s fiscal monetary & regularatory policy be based on ?”
There were 3 questions I listed in one sentence , k/r answered none
k/r didn’t even answer the first 2 questions,because hedidn’t understand them as he is not qualified.
The 3rd question ‘which economists theory …etc ‘ k/r incidently did not answer either because whilst Google will give him a list of economists , k/r not knowing them did not know which to pick , without again proving he’s a cut & paste financial kowledge fake
(ps/ k/r in avoiding the 3rd question ,
(a) look at his ‘Regulation’ answer , its either
k/r by making a meaningless motherhood comment , k/r is acknowledging he not only doesn’t know hthte relevant economists but does not know Obama’s policy responsibility for ‘regulation’ (which was not question 3/ anyway) or k/r is acknowleding POTUS have no responsibilty , alittle odd seeing he’s many times bloged Bush the POTUS has caused the financial mess due non regulation ,
….but realy k/r doesn’t know the economists names answers “which economists theory is Obama’s fiscal monetary & regularatory policy be based on ?”
(b) look at his silly fiscal policy quote “Fiscal Policy which is what governments do with budgets and tax policy” We know that !! the question he avoided was
“which economists theory is Obama’s fiscal monetary & regularatory policy be based on ?”
(c) ditto , monetary policy , a Fed sets it like here but underpined by what monetary policys economic theorys the Govt of the day lives by , witness Rudd & Swans declared views pre election, but again k/r doesn’t know which economists to pick.
But worse by k/r , his non answers further revealed his lack of any financial expertise
Hiopefully k/r ‘s exposure …again , will result in him trying to unsuccessfilly to gain attention & find his now forever lost economic credibilty and no doubt a particular site and google will be used extensively from the moment this post hits
Ron at 2004
An alternative conclusion is that maybe you lack an ability to construct and articulate a series of independent questions. Before you attack someone else – perhaps you should look inwards and ask yourself one single difficult question. In the meantime – take a look at the articles that KR posted. You may learn something. After that, go away and spend some time trying to reformulate your remaining questions using something close to or approximating normal grammatical constructions and punctuation, then come back, and without insult or generalization, try to pitch your remaining questions.
Go on – I dare you.
I think we can picture which way Jimmy Carter is leaning.
Catrina @ 2006 – Re Jimmy Carter – Yes, the sense is that he is one of the SD’s who have decided the latest atrocity is beyond toleration. There must be a lot of others too. But a holiday tomorrow over there. Do you think that will slow them down?
jaundiced view at 2007
Possibly – there is very little traffic on the SD front this morning.
Although I am expecting some news Hawaii later today.
Good – I’ll check in the AM – I hope the uncommitted Hawaii SD’s are now a lei down misere for Barry!
bye bye for now, PB night shift.
jv – sleep tight!
any late news, catrina?
blindoptimist (a.k.a. my surrogate dog) – nothing yet, a little false alarm a few moments ago but it seems all of America is off on BBQs, pork ribs, corn, salads, etc. – except in Florida where apparently that’s not kosha.
While there is nothing in the news bulletins from the Democratic Party of Hawaii – there are some hints from there front page headlines.
But keep in mind that this was a May 24 announcement and we are now entering May 26 and we don’t have anything official just yet.
Just a note – we are about 20 mins. away from the beginning of the registration process for delegates and alternates for Hawaii. The floor session starts in about 1h 40 min. from now. We should have floor results around 7.45 AM out time – as such we should see this filtering down into the media around 08:00 or 08:30 AM.
An interesting piece over on MSMBC on the subject of race.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/24816109#24816109
jv @ 2007,
Actually Carter strongly hinted a few weeks ago that he was for Obama.
2005
Catrina
It’s hardly likely that Ron is going to read anything, especially judging from the way he writes!
So it’s a case of no learnin’ ‘coz that’s for smarty pants elitist “butterflys”
Ignorance is bliss!
(By the way, the first article cited above is very good, and is a long discussion of the type of economic models Obama employs. Not something you could have a discussion with Ron about I might add!)
Good morning all!
Hillary is deservedly copping a huge backlash for her reference to RFK’s assassination in 1968: one wonders if Senator Clinton wouldn’t be too upset if Obama suffered a similar fate in the next few months?
I ask again? How sincere are ESJ and Ron in their support of Hillary?
Are they real Democrats/supporters of the left/centrists?
2004
Ron
You are a very sad puppy. I’m telling you, go and read, get an education, you appear to be interested in these things (although I’m sure about that), but you are just floundering around here with long unintelligible raves that are, well, just embarrassingly childish.
You are making a fool of yourself, every day, and I’m sorry for making fun of you, but seriously, do you have any idea how silly you appear?
Progressive, there is no reason to suppose E & R would support Hillary. They are republican spoilers.
Dyno – [Actually Carter strongly hinted a few weeks ago that he was for Obama.]
Yes true, but the determination for it to be over now seems to be hardening from his comments.
Haha – I like Axelrod on Hillary’s ‘tortured math’ and ‘tortured logic’ on the popular vote:
He added, “This isn’t ‘American Idol,’ OK? This is a nominating process. We have rules. We elect delegates state by state.”
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/25/campaign.wrap/
Judge Growler way back at 1926.
My preference for the Intrade figures over polling is because of two basic things;
(1) Voluntary voting in the US combined with poor pollster methodology and samples way too small for the environment make most polls a dubious representation of reality to begin with. There’s only a hand full of pollsters in the US (like Gallup and a couple of the media polls for example) that do it properly. Most US pollsters aren’t worth a Westpoll, let alone a headline. Yet those shitty little polls pollute all the poll averages so the uncertainty gets ballooned out even further.
(2) Intrade (and the Iowa Electronic Markets which start their State based betting market on the election soon) have pretty much a near perfect record for elections in the US at all levels of government. These prediction markets work better than our betting markets in Australian politics because they have large volume and are based on contract bids – meaning that there is absolutely no manipulation of the price by bookies, since there is, effectively, no bookie involved at all.
The “political industry” in the US is enormous compared to Australia, so there’s a huge market of highly informed individuals and participants. Nearly every state based political organisation runs focus group research and polling of their own which are of a far higher standard than most the piffle that passes for polling in the US – because of this there is literally thousands of people that see the results of that polling across the US (even though each person may only see research conducted in their own State), but polling that never finds it’s way into the media unless it is deliberately leaked to them as part of the wider propaganda war of one of the parties.
That makes Intrade and the IEM aggregators of both inside knowledge as well as the premium knowledge of the broader politically engaged demographic.
Intrade and IEM will IMHO be a much better representation of political reality in each State in terms of voting intention on the ground, with the polls being useful on the qualitative side. So if, say, Ohio makes a big move in the markets – it will tell us that there is something going on in Ohio which is where the demographic breakdown of the Ohio polls then comes in handy, helping us to see what demographics *_MAY_* be responsible for that movement, and why people are moving.
But the actual movement itself will, if history continues, be better represented by the contract markets.
Progressive at 2020, I share your scepticism. Anyone with the level of hatred of Obama cant be a Democrat supporter. As I’ve said many a time, most of the Obama supporters here would certainly have supported Hillary v McCain, but the Hillary suporters would not support Obama v McCain
Almost a great strategy- posing as Hillary supporters to trash Obama, even posing as an Obama supporter turned Hillary supporter…Unfortunately the posts are so ridiculous that it’s obviously a set-up. Not too great after all. The best troll is a subtle and sneaky one
Andrew: spot on mate! I happily would have supported Hillary if she was in Obama’s position right now!
There’s a bizarre irony in ESJ supporting Hillary,in that her economics are far more interventionist and Keynesian than Obama’s from what I’ve read, who sits more in the middle between Keynes and Friedman.
How’s that for classic irony? The old rightwing stirrrer supports the more radically leftwing Hillary Clinton?
Too funny for words really.
Were the boot on the other foot, how would it have been handled….??
“Barack Obama passed up an opportunity to pile onto Hillary Clinton’s problems Saturday, essentially giving her a pass when asked about her recent remarks about Robert Kennedy’s assassination.
“I have learned that when you are campaigning for as many months as Sen. Clinton and I have been campaigning, sometimes you get careless in terms of the statements that you make,” Obama told Radio Isla in Puerto Rico, where he and Clinton stumped in advance of the June 1 primary. “And I think that is what happened here.
“Sen. Clinton says that she did not intend any offense by it and I will take her at her word on that,” Obama continued.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/05/25/2008-05-25_obama_assassination_flap_overrated.html
New Montana poll:
Obama 52
Clinton 35
I didn’t think there were black people in Montana LOL
Kirribilli: thanks for the laugh, my day isn’t complete without more inane offerings from Ron and ESJ LOL
The real world beckons!
Cheers all!
Ron at 1952,
Relying on betting markets in the US for politics is only absurd if you are allergic to historical accuracy.
Believing that those markets are like betting on the ponies is a security blanket of absurdity. They’re more akin to grain futures markets, not your local TAB.
Hillary’s RFK moment, the Rev Wright beat-up and Michelle’s ‘proud of my country’ moment- all stories that didn’t deserve anything close to the media attention they were given, while REAL stories like Bill’s involvement with a Canadian company currying favour with a dictatorship go virtually unnoticed:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1211717584-DENrzciUF+Z1YvAoRsUvKQ&oref=slogin
Journalism is now all about the ‘Gotcha’ moment. In this day and age it’s doubtful that Watergate would have been given anything more than a small mention on page 4. It required serious investigation – not the MSM’s strong suit these days.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10604.html
Progressive @ 2019 – Hillary sure is copping it, and this morning’s world coverage means her position is even more untenable – all in full view of the remaining SD’s. Oh dear, poor Hillary. For example:
The Clinton campaign is in full push-back mode this morning, trying to “set the record straight” and contain the damage from Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s comments Friday about Bobby Kennedy.
The Daily News trumpeted a letter from Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on its front page on Sunday. Mrs. Clinton wrote a long letter to The Daily News in New York, which was printed in the news pages and in which Mrs. Clinton said her remarks were taken entirely out of context.
Who on this earth does she think she is kidding? Taken out of context? Is this the new expression for ‘misspoke’ ???.
As Jen once said, I think – ‘toast’. With the dial turned up to 10.
link to 2034
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/25/clinton-defends-rfk-remarks/
2032
Possum Comitatus
“allergic to historical accuracy”! LOL
Also allergic to:
Logic
Syntax
Grammar
Spelling
Education
…and smartarse elites who actually know what they’re talking about.
It’s an impressive list, but alas, anit-histamines will not reduce the symptoms.
A NYTimes blogger says it all, and very well:
During the now infamous ABC debate, which has widely been criticized as the most despicably tabloidistic, guilt-by-association smearing Presidential primary debate in history, something very telling happened….
Hillary spent the entirety of the first three quarters of an hour hammering away at Obama with the Rovian guilt-by-association attacks via Ayers, Farrakhan, and Wright et al. When it finally came to be Hillary’s turn to field a a tabloid question, her sniper fire incident, Obama spent the entirety of his response time defending her.
As soon as he was finished, she went back to attacking him without hesitation. This latest gaffe tells a very similar story.
Hillary knows perfectly well that the last thing Obama is is an elitist. She knows perfectly well the history behind the right-wing extremist attack on education. In the mid 90’s a number of studies showed that the educated overwhelmingly favored academics, and academics were very harsh on Republicans. As a defense, Republicans instituted the bizarre, counterproductive strategy of stigmatizing the educated as “ivory tower elitists.”
I knew the Clintons were capable of just about anything, but I never guessed they would have borrowed this page right out of the right-wing extremist playbook.
What was particularly bizarre is that the Clintons were trying to stigmatize Obama’s association with people like Wright out of one side of there mouth, while stigmatizing him as an educated elitist out of the other side.
As we all know, Hillary, despite the fact that she knew perfectly well that Obama is the farthest thing from an elitist, she used the “bitter” gaffe to launch a massive, multi-million dollar attack on Obama on every media front. Every rally, every press interview, from every one of her surrogates used to gaffe to launch a nonstop barrage in an effort to polemicize the blue collar vote from two of Obama’s strongholds, the college educated and African Americans.
Just as with that ABC debate, instead of mirroring Hillary’s attacks and launching a multi-million dollar nonstop media attack on every front as she did, he has taken the high road..
That’s the enormous difference in integrity between the two.
— Posted by g english
KR – Also on that NYT blog page is a moderator’s comment that in itself tells you why this is the penultimate disaster for Hillary. It also tells us what the remaining SD’ will now be thinking:
Note to Readers:
First of all, thank you for your patience as we’ve tried to manage the very high volume of comments on the posts this weekend about Senator Clinton’s remarks.
2037:
KR, that’s one of the reasons why I would be deeply embarrassed today if I had been a Hillary supporter.
JV: Huffington Post also clocked up more than 17,000 comments on their story of Hillary’s assassination gaffe, and still counting…
The vast majority of comments on any blog are anti-Hillary.
But on another level, it’s also disappointing that these “gotcha” moments pull in the readers. It only encourages the MSM to ditch proper investigative journalism in favour of these quick and dirty stories.
[JV: Huffington Post also clocked up more than 17,000 comments on their story of Hillary’s assassination gaffe, and still counting…]
Actually just hit 18,000…
Hang on guys – I’m sure Ron or Growler said that this wouldn’t be nearly as big as Pastorsauce gate. Afterall- knowing someone who said something that is controversial, vs the candidate publicly admitting she is thinking about the possibility of her rival’s murder as a way to the nomination is incomparable. Apparently the pastor is far far worse (!).
And so we see the dissonance (grinch-pot, black and all that) engaged by those who have a blind and unswerving hatred of a man who has shown decency througout, not to mention an amazing resilience. The only favour Hillary has done him is dispell the myth that he won’t withstand a Repug attack. Friendly-fire appears to be way worse.
JV -I’ve said the T-word may more than once. Cremated more like it.
succinct…
“But with both feet in her mouth, she doesn’t have a leg to stand on.”
Michael Goodwin – Daily News.
Prog #2030: “I didn’t think there were black people in Montana LOL”
Obama gets the 3 add-on superdelegates from Hawaii.
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080525/BREAKING01/80525050
Not the biggest surprise there though.
Al at 2045
Drip, drip, drip – it a working strategy.
it’s
An interesting article up on the NYTs taking a flashback to the campaign at December 8, 2006 (together with readers comments and all).
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2006/12/08/2008-like-its-today-7/
Possum @ 2024,
Thanks for that.
However, it does sound a bit like the computer in the Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy that found the answer to the meaning of life to be 42.
I am a little suspicious of magic everything machines that are never wrong. They tend to be a bit like those punting systems that work until you put your money down.
When you say “perfect”, is that in terms of picking results or margins. How far out are they accurate? There are a myriad of similar questions. Perhaps you can link us all up with some further general information.
At this stage, interested but not persuaded.
Obama’s response to the RFK so-called gaffe (not sure what ‘gate’ this is called, Finns should come up with something being the expert on gates), shows integrity and contrasts sharply with Hillarys reponse to Wright and elitism. A fitting end to this contest