December 24, 2007

"It's apparently endorsement season in the blogosphere."

Writes Dan Drezner, reflecting on Andrew Sullivan's endorsement of Ron Paul. (Note: For the Republican nomination. Sullivan endorsed Barack Obama on the Democratic side, so... do the math.)

Do you want your bloggers endorsing candidates? Perhaps some, but not all. I don't see myself as the candidate-endorsing sort of blogger.

34 comments:

Blake said...

Isn't endorsement a kind of unbloggy thing, unless it's done ironically?

"I'm voting for Bullwinkle and so should all of you!"

"Well, if Althouse says so."

I think it'll be more interesting to read how you arrive at who you're going to vote for. Your stories of previous decisions have reflected an idiosyncratic process to say the least.

Ron said...

Maybe campaigns should be funded by endorsements...from sponsers! The candidates would have to wear suits with logos stuck on them like race car drivers...

Ron said...

Please never support a candidate in a vlog, ending with "I'm Ann Althouse and I support this message."

George said...

Fine.

Consider having a series of guest bloggers, each of whom supports a different candidates, and let them mix it up with the mob.

Ann Althouse said...

Have you ever seen a guest blogger around here?

Ann Althouse said...

Blake: "Isn't endorsement a kind of unbloggy thing, unless it's done ironically?"

It doesn't fit my idea of blogginess.

"I think it'll be more interesting to read how you arrive at who you're going to vote for. Your stories of previous decisions have reflected an idiosyncratic process to say the least."

Yes, that is my style. I'm thinking of doing some archaelogy through the old posts, as I did in '04 with "How Kerry lost me."

But mainly, I prefer my political detachment.

Slim999 said...

Couldn't agree more with you Ann

Sully's "endorsement" of Ron Paul and Barack Hussein Obama is just Sullivan's way of convincing himself that his opinion sways votes.

It's the epitomy of arrogance - and probably guaranteed to ensure that neither one of those candidates gets the nomination.

Kos is the best example of this phenomenon. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have kneecapped him, and ensured continued the indiscriminate killing of innocenct civilians in Iraq (if you believe Kos), because everyone Kos endorses loses!

rdkraus said...

Is there a significant difference between a blogger saying:

1. I endorse Hillary Clinton.

and

2. I voted for Al Gore and I'll probably end up voting for Hillary Clinton.

Either way, the blogger is expressing their preference and will or will not influence their readers.

Doyle said...

It doesn't fit my idea of blogginess.

That's because your idea of blogginess is claiming to be a Democrat while writing just like a wingnut, thus guaranteeing you links from Reynolds, Ace and friends.

For you to endorse a candidate would require more honesty than you've ever displayed here.

tightspotkilo said...

I dunno. Blogger's endorsements can be useful. For one thing, by endorsing Paul and Obama, Sullivan has once and for all put to final rest the affected ruse that he's some kind of a conservative.

SMGalbraith said...

Sullivan has once and for all put to final rest the affected ruse that he's some kind of a conservative.

Indeed. Someone who claims to embrace a "conservatism of doubt" or a "politics of scepticism" cannot - simply can not - support the radical program of Ron Paul.

Whether you agree or not with Paul's views, you have to admit that he would enact a radical change - for good or bad - in the role of government in our lives.

There is every bit the dogmatic approach to the world in Paul's policies as there is in any neocon vision of planting the flag of democracy around the world.

Trillion dollar tax cuts, removal of the US from NATO and other agreements, pulling all of out troops from overseas, dismantling half, if not more, of the federal agencies.

Those may be good polices; but they're not a program of "doubtful conservatism".

SMG

Simon said...

Ann: I don't want to see an endorsement, but I'd be interested to know whether you're open to the possibility of voting for Romney, since he looks to be leading the GOP pack at the moment. You've written to praise his political skills recently, but that's a far cry from saying if you like him.

tightspotkilo said...

Those may be good polices; but they're not a program of "doubtful conservatism".

They may or may not be good policies, but either way they have nothing to do with conservatism. They are from some other belief system out there in hyperspace.

gail grimmel said...

Conservatives need to go with John McCain. I like Mitt Romney, but he could not win an election against Clinton or Obama. He could compete against Clinton because of her high unfavorables, but I think Obama would beat him. Oh, it has been fun seeing the Clinton campaign implode, and I think Obama will beat Clinton. I know, I know, in a colorblind society where merit should hold ultimate sway, OBAMA isn't even qualified to be assistant majority whip. He's missed a 1/3 of his votes during the 2005-2006 session, and he hasn't held a hearing as member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Sadly, America is not a colorblind society where merit holds ultimate sway. It is very sad that American's don't see the racism in voting for an unqualified candidate just because he is Black as a way to prove that America is sorry for its past. Sadly, the media will blast us when we attack him for the following policy positions:

1) Raising taxes on the middle class to fund social security (he wants to lift the cap to 115k)
2) Attempt to make it easier for employers who hire illegal aliens.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,285436,00.html
3) Indicating in 1996 that he supported a ban on manufacturing handguns.
4) Said the troops who died in Iraq were wasted lives.
5) While pretending he is moderate or independent, votes with the Democratic majority 95% of the time.
6) Does not think we should label the Iranian Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization despite the fact they kill our troops.
7) voted present (the only present vote) on a bill banning adult shops near schools
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/taylor-marsh/obamas-present-vote-ig_b_77713.html

Despite these positions, Romney would not beat him because Romney has already been presented to the public as a world class flip flop. Whether you think thats fair or not, the polls indicate its the truth. In any case, McCain is the only person with a legitimate chance to beat Clinton or Obama. I know we may not agree with him on everything, but when it comes to foreign policy, judges (I'll weigh his votes for Alito and Roberts over his gang of 14 compromise), and entitlements, I'll take him over a Democrat any day. McCain will play well amongst independents in the midwest, and he is popular throughout the Northeast.

Have you seen Survey USA's latest polls? Even in liberal bastions like Massachusetts and New York, McCain does extremely well against Obama. (Deval Patrick is a liability for Obama in Massachussetts)

I can't wait for Obama to be branded as the Affirmative Action president when civil rights initiatives that are similar to theo ne passed in michigan will be on the ballot all across America.

Mortimer Brezny said...

Have you ever seen a guest blogger around here?

No, but Simon and I have been trying out for that post for sometime, you just keep ignoring us.

Blake said...

Gail,

Have I seen your message posted somewhere else? It sounds (almost?) identical to something else I've read recently.

Blake said...

Yes, that is my style. I'm thinking of doing some archaelogy through the old posts, as I did in '04 with "How Kerry lost me."

But mainly, I prefer my political detachment.


Plus, it drives some people completely bananas. Heh.

Fen said...

But mainly, I prefer my political detachment.

As do I. Some of my fav blogs are overflowing with PR spin re their supported candidate. I get enough of that from the campaigns. What was once an interesting blog with a variety of topics is now no beeter than a campiagn mailer.

Doyle: ...claiming to be a Democrat

Uh, she IS a Democrat. Registered as such, with a history of voting for Dem candidates and supporting Dem issues.

while writing just like a wingnut

Democrats are still allowed to criticize their own party Doyle. Your fantasy facism is not yet in play.

BTW, I'm trying to think of the last time you criticized a Leftist position or candidate. Little help? Or do you just swallow whatever propaganda is spoon-fed to you?

Fen said...

Gail...Have I seen your message posted somewhere else? It sounds (almost?) identical to something else I've read recently.

It is. I think Gail forgot to quote and attrib properly.

Revenant said...

Gail...Have I seen your message posted somewhere else?

The same person has been posting slightly-altered versions of the same rant all around the blogosphere under various aliases -- "gail grimmel", "fred jackson", "sadhana khan", "The Waterboy", and "virgina4kerry", to name a few. The pattern's always the same -- a quip about "colorblind society" where "merit[ocracy]" holds "ultimate sway", followed by the statement that Obama is unfit to be the [assistant]minority/majority whip.

Interestingly, whoever it is alternately poses as a conservative (as "gail" does here) and as a long-time democrat. Over in the Kos forums he/she claims to be willing to support the Democratic candidate regardless of who it is. I wonder -- is he/she just a troll, or is he/she affiliated with one of the rival campaigns? :)

Fen said...

Yah Rev, but I recall seeing the exact words from her paragraphs in a colorblind society...attack him for the following policy positions on another blog. Can't recall where atm, but it reeks of plagiarism.

rcocean said...

My guess it that "Gail Grimmel" is in fact:

ANDREW SULLIVAN!

Ann Althouse said...

Thanks for the detective work on Gail.


blake said..."Plus, it drives some people completely bananas. Heh."

Ha ha. Yes. It's quite a gimmick. Easy for me to do though because I'm actually jotting down my real impressions (to the extent that I think they'll be intriguing).


fen said..."'But mainly, I prefer my political detachment.' As do I. Some of my fav blogs are overflowing with PR spin re their supported candidate. I get enough of that from the campaigns."

Thanks. Yes, the campaigns see the blogs as potential free advertising and too many blogs just do it.

I don't know how the campaigns decide which blogs to target. I'm too evasive for any campaign to rely on... but a couple campaigns feed me stuff all the time.

Fen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fen said...

/clarify re Gail's plagairism

Rev, I meant that I read it from some blogger or editorial, not a commenter.

I'm looking around, but my mother's search engine sucks.

Simon said...

Mortimer Brezny said...
"[Ann asked if you've ever seen a guest blogger around here?] No, but Simon and I have been trying out for that post for sometime, you just keep ignoring us."

For the record, I love this blog, and for that reason must demur; if anyone was ever going to be a guest blogger for Ann, I can't imagine anyone less suited to the job than me. For starters, I would double the number of footnotes ever posted here in my first day! I'm a fan first, a reader second, a commenter third, and a dissenter when necessary. :)

Simon said...

You'll remember Gail's comment from such posts as this one.

Trooper York said...

I vote for Titus as the guest blogger. It would definately get you a lot of links.

amba said...

I didn't know you could "endorse" one of each.

I couldn't "endorse" any of these characters even if I thought that was my role. I do know how I intent to vote, though, and it's sort of one of each.

I believe Giuliani-Huckabee will be the Republican ticket. If they go up against Hillary, I vote for them. If they go up against Obama, I probably vote for him. Why? Given a basic level of intelligence and resolve, you have to go with the young and fresh even at the price of inexperience.

I do get a faintly JFK-ish vibe from him (in the "new generation," publicly idealistic sense), which does make me fear a nightmare replay of the assassination trauma.

Simon said...

amba said...
"If they go up against Obama, I probably vote for him. Why? Given a basic level of intelligence and resolve, you have to go with the young and fresh even at the price of inexperience."

That can't be the criterion. Not if young and fresh is clearly disingenuous and wants to forge ahead in a direction you don't agree with.

Revenant said...

That can't be the criterion.

I'm tempted to vote for him just so I never, ever have to listen to another person whine about how minorities can't get ahead in America.

Blake said...

...and Rev shows a little Christmas naivete as he presumes that the race hucksters would stop bitching just because a black man got elected President.

Revenant said...

Oh, I'm sure they'll keep bitching. I'll just have an unbeatable trump card to play on them. :)

Maria said...

I appreciate your comment guys thanks for the response,Please check my men's dress shirts product.