November 3, 2008

If McCain wins, will you Obama supporters handle it as well as Bill Kristol plans to handle the Obama victory?

Bill Kristol gives you some reasons why you should:
1. It would be a victory for an underdog....

2. It would be a defeat for the establishment....

3. It would be [anti-Bush]....

4. It would be a victory for freedom....

5. A McCain victory would be good for liberalism....

If McCain wins, think of this column as a modest contribution to cheering up distraught liberals. If Obama prevails, I’m confident there are some compassionate liberals out there who will do the same for hapless conservatives as they hobble out to the wilderness.
If Obama wins, some Obama supporters will gloat and taunt. I won't, but it will happen. Bill will have to deal with that. I can believe he won't gloat and taunt if McCain wins, but, obviously, some will.

Kristol makes me think about how I felt on election night in 2004, as I sat watching the returns, fully believing that I would see John Kerry's victory. I had already adjusted to seeing my man lose:
Yes, I care a lot about the outcome of the election, and I'm sitting here waiting for the news to come in, sampling the dribbled out exit polls, and fretting. But at the same time, I feel complete assurance that as soon as the outcome is known, I'll fully accept it. Either man will make a decent enough President. I think Bush deserves to continue in office, but if it is to be Kerry, Kerry can handle the job too.... Despite all this political blogging, I'm not really all that political.... It will be nice to break loose from the grip of politics that has held us for so long. As I blogged long ago, I've had preferences in presidential elections going all the way back to 1960, and only one man I've supported has been President. (In case you've forgotten or are not a long-time reader, that man was Bill Clinton.) I'm accustomed to spending election night seeing my man lose.
You young people who think it will be just terrible if you don't get your way this time, let me tell you: I was over 40 before I saw my candidate for President win.
... Basically, I am a grand supporter of losers. My support is the kiss of death. Oh, no! Have I gone all pessimistic? No, no. It is equanimity that flows through me. Time for a nice glass of win, a plate of pasta with Bolognese sauce, and a calm absorption of reality.

UPDATE: "A nice glass of win" -- ah, so hope does live on! Time for a nice glass of wine and toast to hope! A glass to be refilled later, perhaps, in a quenching of sorrow!

ANOTHER UPDATE: 10:53 p.m. Maybe I am going to get that nice glass of win after all....
Ha ha. That was so weird.

The worst thing about an Obama loss -- something Kristol doesn't mention -- is the Bradley effect. After all these polls, if Obama doesn't win, people are going to think that racial prejudice played a role. Because of this, it's very hard to say that because McCain supporters will handle a loss well, Obama supporters should too. It will hard not to feel disillusioned if the polls have misled us.

323 comments:

1 – 200 of 323   Newer›   Newest»
Bob said...

Ann Althouse: It will hard not to feel disillusioned if the polls have misled us.

Correct that to say pollsters instead of polls, and you will have a more correct analysis.

rhhardin said...

Al Franken describes Kerry losing. real audio.

bleeper said...

Racism as displayed by Jesse Jackson, perhaps?

Simon said...

"My support is the kiss of death."

The silver lining of your voting for Obama. ;)

Brian Doyle said...

Bill Kristol is a lying scumbag who's glibly, arrogantly wrong about everything.

Unknown said...

Racism is already factored into the polls..

My uncle, a Democrat, refuses to vote for a black guy for President and he proudly says so. But if a pollster called him, he'd have no problem saying that he's voting for McCain.

Obama by 9.

Guesst said...

Kerry in 2004, Obama in 2008, Ann?
Hmm.

I have been confused for months about why you play the "undecided" game, rather than take a position as a leftist-liberal when you clearly lean that way.

Sincerely.

I am anxious to see how you blog events during the next few years should your boy win, and I hope readers hold your feet to the fire as Obama fails again and again.

Brian Doyle said...

Correct that to say pollsters instead of polls, and you will have a more correct analysis.

Even more correct would be: "McCain's gonna get smoked and bob's gonna cry like a little girl."

Dust Bunny Queen said...

If Obama wins, some Obama supporters will gloat and taunt. I won't, but it will happen. Bill will have to deal with that. I can believe he won't gloat and taunt if McCain wins, but, obviously, some will.

If Obama wins it might be a very long time before we attend a family function again. We could barely stand it with all the BDS stinking up the place.

If Obama wins, we have already made our financial plans and are adjusting our income, expenses, spending, and taxes accordingly. We anticipate a severe downturn in our income. :-)

People across the nation will be hiding wealth and income with more diligence than a cat in a ltter box hiding scat.

Brian Doyle said...

People across the nation will be hiding wealth and income

You mean what wealth and income they have left after the Bush years?

MadisonMan said...

Given that my support for Obama is not very enthusiastic -- although I'll say it's as enthusiastic a support as I've ever given a Senator running for the Presidency -- I think I'll survive.

As in the last election, I will focus on a particularly loathesome politician I want to lose. It was Santorum in '04 -- good riddance to that addlepated idjit! If Gard does not win, and Dole loses (and Stevens, but why would anyone vote for a convicted felon? Wait, don't answer that), I'll be happy enough. Kick all the long-term incumbents out! Yes John Murtha and Tammy Baldwin, that means YOU.

Meade said...

"Because of [the Bradley effect], it's very hard to say that because McCain supporters will handle a loss well, Obama supporters should too."

In that case, Obama supporters should be reminded that the "Bradley effect" is no more than an unproven theory. As such, it is more applicable to Democratic Party primary elections because that is the party where most covert racist voters reside.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

"You mean what wealth and income they have left after the Bush years?"

Not my fault if you can't handle your own money and have no income or wealth to protect. :-)

Unknown said...

You mean what wealth and income they have left after the Bush years?

Will you lefties make up your frickin' mind? I thought the rich were getting richer and everyone else was getting poorer. That's why I thought it was time for us to do our patriotic duty, after all, and pay more income tax.

Unknown said...

And its quite obvious hat Kristol believes McCain is going to win. The entire wingnut bubble does.

Then again, they thought Dole would be Clinton in 96.

Simon said...

Dust Bunny Queen said...
"People across the nation will be hiding wealth and income with more diligence than a cat in a ltter box hiding scat."

Here's the problem. Suppose everyone who opposes Obama to pull their money out of the stock market at the same time on 1/20 and inaugurate Obama's administration with the actual collapse of the financial system. You might think "this will surely prevent him from doing all that loony stuff he wanted to do." But then all you've done is give him a crisis, which will serve as an excuse for him to do all manner of extreme stuff. We saw how readily a supine public accepted the measures adopted to handle a fictitious crisis; imagine how much more pliable they will be in a real crisis.

Unknown said...

Well yeah, but since we've pulled all our assets off the table, we'll survive.

Brian Doyle said...

Will you lefties make up your frickin' mind? I thought the rich were getting richer and everyone else was getting poorer.

That's a new one.

Let's just say that the idea is to make the poor better off not to make everyone poorer.

Unknown said...

Given what has happened over the last eight years, which came out of the eight years before that, an Obama victory would set up a period of intense scrutiny. Not by the MSM which as they did with WJC will be slow to criticize, or opinion wonks like Kristol, but by average people who will very disapointed in an Obama presidency. That's not speculation on my part, he won't be that good.

While I don't expect idiots dressed up like the grim reaper, with signs equivalent to "Bush Lied, People Died" or bumper stickers proclaiming the date the Obama presidency will end, it could be ugly.

Brian Doyle said...

Well yeah, but since we've pulled all our assets off the table, we'll survive.

LOL. Good for you!

Unknown said...

Kinda difficult to take threats about a stock market collapse under an Obama Presidency seriously, especially when this administration has overseen a stock market DROP of 13% over the last 8 years.

I'll take my chances with Obama thank you very much.

Unknown said...

You haven't made money these last eight years DTL? Hmm.

Palladian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...

Aww, Palladian, I wish you hadn't grown a conscience there! That was a good one.

Simon said...

SteveR said...
"I don't expect ... bumper stickers proclaiming the date the Obama presidency will end...."

With Bush, we knew in advance what that date would be.

Palladian said...

I know, I know, MCG. Not really a conscience, but in another thread I admonished Simon not to engage "the Demon" so I decided I shouldn't do it either.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Suppose everyone who opposes Obama to pull their money out of the stock market at the same time on 1/20 and inaugurate Obama's administration with the actual collapse of the financial system

This has already been factored into the market. The market always looks ahead and is a leading indicator.

Similarly with commodity futures and the drop in oil. The traders anticipate much less demand due to a recession (or even depression) and a slowed economy.

Why do you think we have had such volitilty in the past few months? Those who can are making storm preparations.

J said...

"It will hard not to feel disillusioned if the polls have misled us"

But maybe it would push them to give us the raw data too, not just the data adjusted for assumptions. With a black leftist on the ticket, we are in completely uncharted territory in this election, and it's entirely possible conventional polling assumptions are giving us bad info. For one thing, pollsters seem to be assuming a disproportionate dem turnout based on dems having much higher enthusiasm for their candidate; the vast majority of McCain supporters I know are lukewarm at best towards McCain, but all are extremely motivated to vote against Obama. Do the polls factor that in?

Unknown said...

My pay rises were a hell of a lot bigger under Clinton than under Bush.

And while I've saved a lot of money, I have had a negative return on my stock investments over the last 8 years.

Did pretty good on my home though, making about $3 million on my real estate investment. But that's only because the New York real estate market hasn't gone down yet. But that downturn is actually starting.

Brian Doyle said...

For one thing, pollsters seem to be assuming a disproportionate dem turnout based on dems having much higher enthusiasm for their candidate

Actually I think this is based on higher party ID numbers for Democrats than in '00 or '04.

Unknown said...

I am starting to pile money into the market though, anticipating an Obama victory.

Wall Street likey Obama.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Wall Street likey Obama

Bwahahahahahah!! oh...you were serious?

Unknown said...

I don't know why the hell Ann thought Kerry would win in 2004. The polls had it for Bush by 2-3 and that's what he won by.

The conservative blogs in 2004 were talking about how Bush would score an upset in New Jersey and Maryland. He didn't of course, but that's where their thinking was.

The fact that the conservative blogs are now talking about McCain pulling through a victory in Indiana, Virginia, and North Carolina pretty much sums up where this election is right now.

garage mahal said...

Why do you think we have had such volitilty in the past few months?

So it wasn't solely dumb poor minorities defaulting on their mortgages?

Triangle Man said...

It would be delightful if both sides' supporters could accept defeat graciously. I think many on the Obama side would, and I think Obama would. However, I think it is natural for supporters of a side who suffer a more disappointing loss to react more negatively. Obama is leading in the polls so a loss for Obama is a greater disappointment for his side. Add to that the losses in 2000 and 2004 and I might anticipate greater exasperation than you would see in McCain supporters who generally are hopeful that McCain will win, and think he could win, but have already begun to accept that a loss could very well happen.

I'm Full of Soup said...

Palladian:

Thanks for the wealth creation tip! But you left out how I can send my bank account info to this upstanding capitalist?

Anonymous said...

After all these polls, if Obama doesn't win, people are going to think that racial prejudice played a role.

After all these polls, if Obama doesn't win, liberals are the only people who are going to think that racial prejudice played a role.

Unknown said...

DTL---I did better under Clinton too. Surely you are taking defensive positions at least for the short term---that is, surely you are readjusting your asset mix (or preparing to) to be better prepared for the new tax structures to come.

Unknown said...

Yes I'm serious.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aRCVqfSQ43Eo&refer=home

It does look like Merrill Lynch likes McCain though. Unfortunately, thanks to Bush, Merrill Lynch no longer exists.

Triangle Man said...

Is there going to be a prognostication thread?

Brian Doyle said...

It would be delightful if both sides' supporters could accept defeat graciously.

I'm actually hoping for a maximum of crazy bleating and conspiracy theories. If wanting to see wingnuts suffer and despair is wrong, I don't want to be right.

Anonymous said...

"Similarly with commodity futures and the drop in oil. The traders anticipate much less demand due to a recession (or even depression) and a slowed economy"

If I had the money, I'd go back into commodities. BO will not do coal (he wants to bankrupt them) there will be no progress on domestic drilling, no nukes. There's going to be lots of research $$$ but not one actual kilowatt produced. Throw in Joe Biden's prediction of a crisis (probably in the Persian Gulf region) and we've got $5.00 gas.

BO is hot-to-trot for ethanol so this should spike food prices.

I wish I was liquid enough to take advantage of this will BO learns Econ 101.

Brian Doyle said...

I wish I was liquid enough to take advantage of this will BO learns Econ 101.

This from a guy who thinks domestic drilling is the difference between cheap and expensive gas.

Unknown said...

Ah, DTL, I see. So Obama is being supported by some of the very people who plugged merrily along while their very companies were dropping into the toilet? Why should any of us be reassured by that?

Brian Doyle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Unknown said...

MCG - I have about 25% of my liquid portfolio in cash. For the other 75%, I'm invested in ETF's, and I am so far underwater, that I would be a happy man if I had to worry about capital gains taxes.

I plan to take a position in a private equity investment in the next month or so.

And I have a substantial inflow of income from the rental on my home (since I no longer live in the US) and I plan on using that money to buy into the market on a dollar cost averaged basis while the market is low.

I'm considering buying some junk bond funds now that yields are high.

The market is anticipating armegeddon. I don't buy it. A severe recession yet, but it'll end.

Anonymous said...

"I wish I was liquid enough to take advantage of this will BO learns Econ 101.

"This from a guy who thinks domestic drilling is the difference between cheap and expensive gas."

It's one of those supply-and-demand things that some people think is a myth.

Unknown said...

Truth be told DTL your plan sounds reasonable enough. The only unknown in my view is how long you'll have to wait for recovery.

Unknown said...

Wall Street was supporting Democrats back in March, prior to the market crash.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/21/nation/na-wallstdems21

Wall Street knew that there were serious economic problems that weren't being addressed. They were not plugging merrily along.

Daryl said...

You're going to see a massive outpouring of relief if McCain wins, not gloating.

Henry said...

In contrast to just about all my friends (my relatives are a more catholic group) I'm unenthusiastically voting for McCain. I actually have a stronger position on the local mayoral and city council race than on the presidential.

If Obama wins, I'll hope for the best. He does have the potential to be a good president, if the power of the position causes him to stop being beholden to his party's cretinous powerbrokers.

Back in 2000 I truly did not care which candidate won. I voted third party. But once Gore challenged the election in the courts I rooted against him. In retrospect I think a Gore victory would have been better for the country, but that's pure supposition.

So put me on the starboard side of Madison Man's standard of cool unenthusiasm. No one knows what either of these candidates would give us.

Unknown said...

Obama's gotta righteous wind at his back! (Thanks Cornerites)

Brian Doyle said...

Arse -

You're right that it's a supply/demand thing, but where you're wrong is thinking that we have enough oil in/offshore the US to make a difference.

There's plenty of technically oil-producing acreage available to oil companies, but they start with the places that are the most economical. It's just not the case that we're sitting on a North Sea-sized reservoir in Texas or something. That's what it would take to matter.

The places that need to ramp up production to (try to) keep pace with annual worldwide demand are offshore Brazil, Nigeria, etc.

Cato Renasci said...

Kristol may handle an Obama victory well, but don't expect the rest of the right to do so. The vast majority of people on the right intend to give Obama exactly the same level of cooperation and support that the Democrats gave George W. Bush - none whatsoever. I think you will see them become almost Churchillian in their resistance. And, many on the right will begin to go John Galt as taxes increase.

I'll even venture that gloating by blacks at Obama's election and the swagger that comes with it will shock a white America looking for post-racial harmony, and set race relations back for 50 years.

Anonymous said...

DTL:

"The market is anticipating armegeddon. I don't buy it. A severe recession yet, but it'll end."

For my 401K/457 sake, I'm hoping you're right.

Brian Doyle said...

The vast majority of people on the right intend to give Obama exactly the same level of cooperation and support that the Democrats gave George W. Bush - none whatsoever.

What? The Democrats were an incredibly compliant minority party from 2000-2006. How do you think we got the PATRIOT Act and the AUMF?

Lem said...

How do you think we got the PATRIOT Act and the AUMF?

Democrats getting blamed for "The wall"

CYA IF we got attacked again.

Unknown said...

The exception that proves the rule, Doyle---and I frankly don't want us to repeat the circumstances that motivated it!

Anonymous said...

With BO's election ,I anticipate lots of 'joy firing' in Gaza.

Brian Doyle said...

Also, the Dems didn't impeach when they had the chance, so you should really be thanking them for being so lenient.

Brian Doyle said...

With BO's election ,I anticipate lots of 'joy firing' in Gaza.

There's gonna be a lot of joy all over the world. It's a safer place with a castrated Republican party.

Cedarford said...

What Kistol asks is a stupid, masturbatory Neocon exercise of a man soon justly to be considered a pariah in both Parties.

At this stage, it is like some Goldwater or McGoverniite supporter saying in the face of doom - "Suppose the polls are wrong and Our Guy wins. Lets debate how you would conduct yourselves..."

No, the more appropriate question is how Bill Kristol will conduct himself. When all the presumption of his influence on the thinking of the President and Republicans running Congress and the wealthy Corporatists all goes away as Bill's sponsors also become pariahs.
When all the TV shows and media offering him fat fees withdraw their sponsorship.
Will Bill Kristol go as gracefully as the Goldwater pimps did? Or the last Nixon loyalists? The intellectuals who defended Jimmy Carter for 4 years?

Palladian said...

"There's gonna be a lot of joy all over the world. It's a safer place with a castrated Republican party."

Yes, it was certainly safer during the Carter administration and during the Clinton administration, when Atta and his band of merry men were plotting 9/11!

But that will all end when the Messiah comes! Peace will issue forth like semen from the blue balls of the world. The blind shall see and the lame shall walk and He shall reign as King! Gloria in Excelsis B.O.

Unknown said...

Zogby International's 2004 predictions
November 2, 2004, 5pm

Bush: 213
Kerry: 311
Too close to call: Nevada (5), Colorado (9)

Brian Doyle said...

Peace will issue forth like semen from the blue balls of the world.

And all over the face of chickenhawk wingnuts everywhere.

Unknown said...

"Aww, crap, I've been doyled!"

Simon said...

LarsPorsena said...
"With BO's election ,I anticipate lots of 'joy firing' in Gaza."

If he loses, I anticipate some firing on our own shores. Polls have been wrong before, and as Althouse notes, the sting of defeat will be even more hardly-felt by Obama supporters if they are wrong this year. Tomorrow night is not a night to be unarmed.

Palladian said...

Even the Cedarfords of the world will rise from their strata of Jurassic limestone and rejoice as the filthy Jew... I mean, "Neocons" are banished into the outer darkness by the coming Prophet. The bottled sun will rise over Israel and the J.. "Neocons" shall reap what they have sown! Gobama! Even Cedarford is on his knees for you! Never mind all that stuff he used to say about you being a puppet of radical Chicago billionaire Jews. All is forgiven. He has seen the Light.

I'm Full of Soup said...

Doyle:

Does Joe Biden fit your criteria for a chickenhawk?

miller said...

If every (so-called) conservative writer said the same things about conservatives and JSM, the complaint would be "see how they all think alike?"

And if writers say different things, the complaint is "see how they all think differently?"

How exactly can this complaint be resolved? The only solution is for conservative writers to just shut up and let the liberals have their unfettered say.

I live in a one-party state, where the Rethuglicans are routinely denied access to power through corrupt elections. (I know, hard to figure out which state - Illinois? Massachusetts? Washington? Maryland? Delaware?) Because the majority party is unopposed it feels it can do pretty much as it likes - the only opposition is from those who argue that it's not going fast enough.

Well, it's what the people want, I guess, because otherwise they'd vote the guys/gals out - except, of course, the ballots keep mysteriously getting jumbled, and the Democrats keep pulling the rabbit out of the hat.

But since they're liberals and it's for the children, why should I have any complaint?

If McCain wins, there won't be just despair in the liberals' minds. There will be violence.

Of course, if Bambi wins, there will be violence, too. I'm pretty well convinced the right thing to do is take Wednesday off from work rather than go downtown.

Brian Doyle said...

Tomorrow night is not a night to be unarmed.

Weirdo.

Palladian said...

"And all over the face of chickenhawk wingnuts everywhere."

But not for long as there will be plenty of Doyles around to eagerly lick it up.

MadisonMan said...

I think I voted for Reagan in '84 so I was 24 when my first candidate won.

That wasn't so much a pro-Reagan vote, though, as an anti-Ferraro vote. The first time I actually voted for a candidate, and the candidate won, was '92, when I was 32.

garage mahal said...

If he loses, I anticipate some firing on our own shores.

I wouldn't worry about it too much, he ain't losing. I think the biggest surprise will be how early it will be called. Bonus surprise picking +8 in the Senate and +20 in the House. Ouch.

Unknown said...

ElectoralVote.com, November 1, 2004:

Kerry 298
Bush 231

Brian Doyle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
miller said...

8 in the Senate sounds doable, frankly.

A few dim bulbs will get replaced.

Unfortunately, other dim bulbs such as Murray are seen as the intellectual powerhouses of the party.

Brian Doyle said...

mcg -

The overwhelming majority of last minute polls in 2004 had Bush winning.

It's certainly not the case that Bush was getting shellacked like McCain is before either of his victories.

Triangle Man said...

LarsPorsena said...

With BO's election ,I anticipate lots of 'joy firing' in Gaza.


Who cares what they think about the election in Gaza? That's just as dumb as basing your vote on how it will be perceived in Paris.

Unknown said...

Nah, just pointing out how wrong pollsters can be.

Honestly, if I were a betting man, I would put my money on Obama. I don't mind saying it. As I said before, I'll be fine either way. I'm just rearranging my portfolio to minimize taxable events, that's all.

PatCA said...

I've decided at the last minute that I have been grievously wrong. I will vote for Obama tomorrow. I have come to see this "spreading the wealth around" thing is a wonderful and fair idea. And, all the cool people will be voting for him.

I plan to submit my application for bailout on November 5!! As an artist and writer, I have suffered so, economically speaking, under this savage capitalistic system.

Perhaps I shouldn't tip my hand, but I hope to requisition one of Charlie Rangel's apartments and Ann's car, Silvio!! I have always wanted to live in Manhattan, and I need a ride, too. I am composing a paen to Dear Leader at this very moment to submit along with my application.

Yes, we can!

Brian Doyle said...

That's just as dumb as basing your vote on how it will be perceived in Paris.

They do that, too (remember the "If Europeans like him we shouldn't" meme?).

Brian Doyle said...

Nah, just pointing out how wrong pollsters can be.

With an example of pollsters getting it right?

holdfast said...

Here's the thing - if McCain wins, conservatives should be too busy figuring out how to thwart the new President's Shamnesty program to spenf time on gloating. Plus, after a lousy campaign with a candidate that most of the party doesn't much like (though they do respect him) there would not be much to gloat about.

If Obama wins (80%+ chance), there will be much gloating on the left - no doubt about it.

Unknown said...

With an example of pollsters getting it right?

What? Did I make a typo? I know there were pollsters that got it right but not the two I posted.

Brian Doyle said...

I know there were pollsters that got it right but not the two I posted.

Yeah most pollsters got it right. It was a close election with Bush slightly ahead.

If Kerry had been winning by Obama-like margins and then lost, you'd have something to be encouraged by, but he didn't so you don't.

Cedarford said...

Palladian - I thought you would be overjoyed with Obama. You may not like Obama cake, but you love the African-American chocolate dicks covered in Obama cake and icing. More gay rights, more salami for you to smoke....more icing to lick and swallow..

As for Obama and his Chicago Jewish mentors (the legal ones like Mikva, the wealthy benefactor ones who nourished his and Michelle's careers, and the Chicago apparachniks that ran his political machine) - I expect them to be richly rewarded with more power, wealth, and influence. I have always argued such - that 76-80% of the Jewish population of the USA and 75% of Jews in Israel prefer Obama to McCain or any other candidate plus undecideds - for reasons of self-interest.

They are not part of the Neocon faction - which were breakway Trotskiites, Alinsky pupils, and Straussians initially. Then joined by various opportunists not of the Jewish Left looking for opportunity elsewhere..

Nor does your critique mention that Neocons are only one factor in the destruction of the Republicans...

Simon said...

Doyle, if he loses, with his supporters this amped up, there will be violence. I don't know what the chances are that he will lose, but if he does, I put the chances of violence ensuing in the 99th percentile. You will have a ready-made powderkeg in Grant Park.

What's interesting is that Greg Palast et al are already claiming the election has been stolen. If Obama wins, such claims will fade into obscurity, covered up and forgotten. If Obama loses, those claims will be the flashpoint for riots. I will be delighted to be proven wrong, but the general tenor of liberals over the last eight years makes the result of a defeat very clear.

miller said...

Bambi will have a filibuster-proof Senate, which means he will be able to get every progressive fantasy passed. Even Reid won't be able to control the irresistible tide.

Hold on to your hats.

The only saving grace is that presidents who win large majorities in Congress tend to govern disastrously & get rebuked. Roosevelt & his court-packing plan. Johnson & his foreign policy. Nixon and his plumbers. Clinton & his magical middle-class tax cut. (Gone in the first months of office, if you remember.)

'Twill be fun to watch the soft bigotry of low expectations take over.

Simon said...

Still, I suppose there's one point of right-left unity today: whether you're a liberal, a conservative or somewhere in between, I think we can all agree that Cedarford is a prick.

Meade said...

I voted with Althouse in 2004 but now we go our separate ways.

One of the reasons I'm voting for McCain tomorrow is because, of the two candidates and their behaviors during this long campaign, McCain best represents evolution beyond racial politics.

Obama played the race card, e.g., Rev. Wright, while much to his credit, McCain admonished his supporters not to.

Obama, as he has already done, will cynically appease the covert racism of white guilt in his white majority supporters. McCain will inspire and lead the country to move beyond racial politics, as he has already done.

Simon said...

A prick and an anti-semite. Sorry, I forgot that important point. Can I get an amen?

Brian Doyle said...

Doyle, if he loses, with his supporters this amped up, there will be violence.

I have supporters?

Look, there won't be violence. You're not going to get a backwards "B" carved in your cheek at an ATM.

The 2004 election was harder to take because while we can certainly surmise that McCain would be an awful president, it was obvious in 2004 that Bush was an awful president. It was a known known.

But again, speculation about violence in response to an Obama loss is pure petulant wankery since he's going to stomp all over McCain and the only people who are going to be driven to violence are wingnuts.

Brian Doyle said...

Amen!

See, we can agree about some stuff.

Anonymous said...

Doyle said...mcg -The overwhelming majority of last minute polls in 2004 had Bush winning.

It's certainly not the case that Bush was getting shellacked like McCain is before either of his victories.


The most accurate national poll in 2004 was by TIPP.

Here's TIPP's national poll as of yesterday.

Obama - 46.7%

McCain - 44.6%

Not Sure - 8.7%

Brian Doyle said...

McCain best represents evolution beyond racial politics.

That's some good unintentional humor right there.

Unknown said...

I agree with Simon on both count---i.e., re: cedarford and riots. In fact, I predict riots even if Obama wins. Victory parties often get out of hand!

miller said...

Must every thread include a reference to The Protocols of the Elders of Zion?

Brian Doyle said...

When even your cherry-picked outlier polls show a loss...

Rich B said...

If Obama loses, besides racism, will his supporters claim that there was supression of legitimate voter fraud?

Triangle Man said...


They do that, too (remember the "If Europeans like him we shouldn't" meme?).


Yes, that's what I was referring to.

Brian Doyle said...

If Obama loses, besides racism, will his supporters claim that there was supression of legitimate voter fraud?

Start thinking about what you're gonna claim when your guy loses.

Simon said...

holdfast said...
"Here's the thing - if McCain wins, conservatives should be too busy figuring out how to thwart the new President's Shamnesty program to spenf time on gloating."

No... This is a mistake. We need to be realists about this. The only obstacle to amnesty was the House Republican Caucus before 2006 and the indolence of the Democrats since then; if Obama wants amnesty, and I think he almost certainly does, he's going to get amnesty. Latinos are overwhelmingly Catholic; this makes them a natural conservative constituency. If they're in, we should be working out how to make sure they vote the right way, not crying over spilt milk and souring relations with a huge new constituency that ought to break overwhelmingly for the GOP if we don't alienate them. I was against amnesty, but that ship has now sailed. We fought it; we lost; we should get used to the idea and concentrate on working out how to appeal to those voters.

miller said...

...the only people who are going to be driven to violence are wingnuts.

Evidence?

Please show me how the "wingnuts" have demonstrated a propensity to violence.

miller said...

Bambi will be for amnesty; you think he'll throw his Aunti under the bus and out of the country at the same time?

Unknown said...

Here's the debate you missed, that could turn the election.

Brian Doyle said...

Please show me how the "wingnuts" have demonstrated a propensity to violence.

Well there was the 60s...

But my point is that they will be the only ones "driven to" violence, because they will be the angry, disappointed ones.

Unknown said...

Doyle, doyle, doyle. Don't you know? We right wingers send our violence overseas so we don't have to practice it here at home.

I'm Full of Soup said...

I have not decided how I will act if Obama wins.

Brian Doyle said...

We right wingers send our violence overseas so we don't have to practice it here at home.

Yeah, right. It's a belt-and-suspenders approach when it comes to brown people.

Henry said...

...the only people who are going to be driven to violence are wingnuts.

Sometimes the threads stick, doing violence on one's fingers, but a little WD40 does the trick.

Anyway, this is a tautology. If an Obama victory drives you to violence, you are a wingnut.

reader_iam said...

I'm going to repeat a question I asked the other day which went unanswered: How many of the people here who predict violence to break out in the wake of the election actually live in neighborhoods in which they expect violence to take place?

Unknown said...

CNBC's Erin Burnett: McCain Win Might Give Stocks 'Big Pop', Market 'Priced In Obama'

“This market has priced in Obama, has not priced in McCain,” Burnett said on the Nov. 3 broadcast. “Some people say that if McCain were to have an upset and win the market might get a big pop, who knows, but down here the conventional wisdom is, is that Obama has been priced into stocks.”

When asked to explain the term "priced in", Burnett said, “It just means the market expects it. So, if Obama wins the market probably isn’t going to do anything one way or the other.”

But Burnett said the markets were even more concerned about a possible 60 seat majority for Democrats in the Senate.

“Now, the one thing that the market is going to watch, um, is, is this filibuster proof 60 that you talk about. That actually matters, whether you are going to get Democrats across the board and get a mandate on that front. The market is watching that, perhaps even more carefully than the presidential side of the election,” Burnett said.

Simon said...

Doyle said...
"Look, there won't be violence. You're not going to get a backwards 'B' carved in your cheek at an ATM."

As I said at the time, the violent rhetoric of the left - combined with actual incidents of violence against the property and persons of McCain supporters by Obama supporters - strongly contributed to the prima facie credibility of Todd's story. No one would have believed that a disgruntled supporter of Evan Bayh beat up a Marvin Scott supporter, but another story about violence by an Obama supporter? Chalk it up and slot it into the pattern.

"[S]peculation about violence in response to an Obama loss is pure petulant wankery since he's going to stomp all over McCain and the only people who are going to be driven to violence are wingnuts."

This is precisely the hubris that makes the situation combustible. Obama's supporters are absolutely certain that their man is going to clean McCain's clock. And maybe he will. But if he doesn't - well, double the pride, twice the fall. When you believe very strongly that you're going to win, when you believe that your opponents are horrible, evil people as the left has spent years screaming at the tops of their lungs, and when people like Greg Palast have already stocked Grant Park with barrels of election fraud gunpowder, it does not take much to imagine the place blowing up if the polls are wrong.

And The polls don't have to be wrong by much - just a little, in certain states. Imagine if it is clear by 11pm that Obama has routed McCain in the popular vote, but that McCain has managed to cobble together 270+ with narrow but unassailable leads in key states. What do you suppose will happen next?

Brian Doyle said...

How many of the people here who predict violence to break out in the wake of the election actually live in neighborhoods in which they expect violence to take place?

Exactly.

Unknown said...

How many of the people here who predict violence to break out in the wake of the election actually live in neighborhoods in which they expect violence to take place?

Not me. How does that matter? Heck if I thought my area was like that I'd have been gone long ago.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

How many of the people here who predict violence to break out in the wake of the election actually live in neighborhoods in which they expect violence to take place?

I predict it whether Obama wins or loses, and I don't live in a neighborhood that is at risk.

reader_iam said...

By the way, thank you, madison man (I think it was you) for pointing out the other day that if one gets the "conflicting edits" message and simply refresh that page, one's comment will post. I've had a lot of problems with that message and often just gave up, but your solution works like a charm! Thanks again!

/OT

Brian Doyle said...

How does that matter?

Because it shows that the people who are worried are suburban whitebread wingnuts like yourself, who expect rioting to take place in communities they know nothing about.

Synova said...

Start thinking about what you're gonna claim when your guy loses.

Um... that more people voted for Obama? That McCain wasn't very exciting? That Republicans are annoyed at Republican politicians, and independent, swing voters, are more likely to vote for the "out of power" party just on principle?

I don't doubt that people will complain of localized vote fraud, particularly if it's as blatant as it was in Washington last time around... but claim the presidential election was "stolen"?

I hope not. I most certainly hope it won't be main-stream the way it's been with Democrats for the last eight years and reports of people having nervous breakdowns and hysteria about it all that was actually encouraged by the very top members of the Democratic party.

Those I know most likely to be most upset by an Obama win are planning to pray for him, that he'll make wise decisions and do a good job.

But what would you expect from those freaky, hateful, Christianist radicals.

And the bright side? Palin 2012, of course. :-)

The Hillary hold-outs are hoping for a McCain win so that Hillary can run in 2012. Same idea, a spot of Obama would make it that much easier for non-Democrats to win in 2012 or 2016.

Brian Doyle said...

And "worry" isn't even the right word. The predictions of violence actually belong more to the "racist slur" family.

integrity said...

Dust Bunny Queen said...
If Obama wins, some Obama supporters will gloat and taunt. I won't, but it will happen. Bill will have to deal with that. I can believe he won't gloat and taunt if McCain wins, but, obviously, some will.

If Obama wins it might be a very long time before we attend a family function again. We could barely stand it with all the BDS stinking up the place.

If Obama wins, we have already made our financial plans and are adjusting our income, expenses, spending, and taxes accordingly. We anticipate a severe downturn in our income. :-)

People across the nation will be hiding wealth and income with more diligence than a cat in a ltter box hiding scat.




So wonderful to hear your family is normal. And look at you, treating their sane reaction to cocksucker Bush and his disastrous 8 years as a syndrome.

I'll trade you my family of right-wing wackjobs for you normal family. You would love them, many of them are just as paranoid, crazed and nitwitty as you.

Witness this gem from my mother 3 days ago:

"you're voting against your own team"

Now how can anyone top my beloved mom's insanity, I ask you? I wonder how many times you have said something similar during this election season?

reader_iam said...

MCG and DBQ: OK, but then what's the point of saying that, other then to release a bogeyman (and yes, I refuse use that extra "o," damn it!!)?

Unknown said...

Sports Riots: The Psychology of Fan Mayhem

Because it shows that the people who are worried are suburban whitebread wingnuts like yourself, who expect rioting to take place in communities they know nothing about.

Who says I'm "worried"? That's certainly not a word I'd assign myself here. I'm just making a prediction.

Synova said...

You know... the people most likely to predict violence is Obama wins are foreign liberals like that stupid Lessing woman, or predict violence if he loses - liberal writers here like Naomi Wolf and Erica Jong and their cadre.

The same ones who hate Palin with so much visceral, irrational hatred that they want to puke.

Do you, Doyle, really think that liberals themselves have been promoting calm reason?

Unknown said...

And "worry" isn't even the right word. The predictions of violence actually belong more to the "racist slur" family.

Really? DId I say only black people riot?

garage mahal said...

Please show me how the "wingnuts" have demonstrated a propensity to violence.

How bout the wingnut that shot up the Knoxville church a few months ago because it was too liberal. Copies of Sean Hannity, Mike Savage for inspiration were found at his home.

Unknown said...

MCG and DBQ: OK, but then what's the point of saying that, other then to release a bogeyman (and yes, I refuse use that extra "o," damn it!!)?

Oh, come on. We're having a relatively isolated discussion here. Any so-called bogeyman is just gonna bounce around this blog and peter out by Wednesday.

It's not like some famous celebrity predicting "blood will run in the streets". I'm just a commenter on a blog making a prediction.

Darcy said...

Well, this question isn't directed to me, as a person voting for McCain. But if McCain loses, I'll be pretty disappointed - but most of all just plain worried. I will still prefer to believe that the vast majority of Obama's supporters will have been well-intentioned people, though.

Unknown said...

Copies of Sean Hannity, Mike Savage for inspiration were found at his home.

Oh my goodness! Are you saying the wingnuts have perfected cloning? Heaven help us all!

Fr Martin Fox said...

1984 was the last time a President was elected I voted for and felt good about. I made the mistake of voting for Bush pere in 1988, but learned my lesson during his term. A candidate I wanted to vote for hasn't appeared on a major party ticket for president since.

As bad as Obama is, I'm even more concerned about the outcome of a McCain victory.

The strength the Democrats will have in Congress, and McCain's need and determination to pass things--not to mention his being a "maverick" (meaning he really is a part-time Democrat)--means he will combine with the Democrats to pass any number of things, and he'll bring along at least some Republicans.

The hope prolifers have of solid nominees to the Supreme Court will be dashed on the rocks of a Democratic Senate; maybe McCain will send up an Alito, only to have him denied confirmation; extremely unlikely he will somehow "fool" the Democrats with a looks-like-Souter-but-votes-like-Scalia; more likely, it'll be another Souter or Kennedy.

Meanwhile, because McCain and the Democrats will pass Democratic policy, it will be the worst of all scenarios: liberal policy with bad effects, blamed on the GOP. Oh yeah, that's what we've had for eight years. Obama's right: McCain is Bush III.

Eight years ago, I told my friends Bush would do great harm to the conservative movement, wreck the GOP, and lead to Democrats taking over Congress and something worse to follow.

reader_iam said...

Well, mcg, then I guess I'm asking you to look at the nature of that prediction and why you're making it, and what purpose it serves, witting or unwitting.

chuck b. said...

If I had piles of cash lying around right now I would totally put it in the stock market. I plan to work for at least 20 more years and I am a big believer in capitalism and the word's desire for it.

This panic in the market is...not bothering me at all. I haven't even looked at my 401k since all hell broke loose, because I'm not going to change anything regardless of what it says. My plan is in place. Steady hands.

The market didn't hit bottom for three years after the crash ringing in the Gread Depression. I fully expect things to get worse in the next few years--regardless of who's President--but I'm not trying to time it.

I'm thinking people should not wish too fervently for their candidate to win this election. Whoever wins, he's going to have a horrible time.

If Obama wins, I figure the Democrats have two years in the majority in Congress before they lose it. It would be a good time for Republicans to be out. They need to retool. (I don't think they can do it in four years tho'. They need longer.)

If McCain wins, nothing much different is going to happen (unless he dies in office which seems unlikely). The big media story will be McCain's judicial picks going through confirmation.

Darcy said...

Excuse me, Father...but is that your endorsement of Obama? I'm very curious.

walter neff said...

President Obama will be a reprise of the mayoralty of David Dinkins on a grander scale.
Both were classy and dignified black machine politicians of an extremely liberal bent who were elected principally because of white liberal quilt, total support of the media, the overwhelming support of their own tribe and a sense that it was “time.” Both had no significant accomplishments to speak of and deep associations with dubious political players who they immediately disavowed when these associations came to light. Both were given every benefit of the doubt and forgiven transgressions that would have sunk the career of any other politician. We can only hope the when President Obama is called to respond to the “test” that his running mate warns us about, he will do better than Mayor Dinkins. Based on his responses when confronted by difficulties on the campaign trail, I am not sanguine in the least.

I think both sides will be very disappointed in the Presidency of Barack Obama.

Put not you faith in princes.

Palladian said...

"I'm going to repeat a question I asked the other day which went unanswered: How many of the people here who predict violence to break out in the wake of the election actually live in neighborhoods in which they expect violence to take place?"

Well I don't really know if there will be violence either way, but if it does, it will certainly happen in my neighborhood. Hell, we have random slashings and machete attacks even when there isn't an election.

reader_iam said...

Anyway, part of the reason I find this meme interesting is that it's one of those which I've also, just recently, encountered IRL, when a couple of friends/family members (who don't live where we live) asked if we were worried about election night because where we live--a very mixed neighborhood, economically, ethnically, racially, occupationally, educationally, class-wise & etc.

I was dumbfounded.

reader_iam said...

It's an urban neighborhood. While I grant you that Davenport, Iowa, is no major metropolis, it's still urban, with urban features, at least in older parts of the city, in one of which I live.

reader_iam said...

So, should I fear more from the neighbor to the left, with the McCain -Palin sign, or the one to the right, with the Obama-Biden sign?

Ought I avoid, altogether, the street parallel to my own, in which, for a block stretch, one side features Obama signs, but the other side features Palin signs?

nrn312 said...

Both had no significant accomplishments to speak of

Spake walter neff of Thee Internet.

blogless said...

I have never liked Bush, but I do think he's been demonized and blamed for every bad thing. Maybe it's just the contrarian in me that's actually making me sympathetic.

But I do think the level of political discourse in the country has gotten so bad (my girlfriend is proud that her 8 year old refers to Bush as "monkey-boy!") that at this point, I hope that Obama wins just because I don't think I can stand having McCain compared to Hitler for the next 4 years. It's so disheartening.

I'm hoping that Obama will be forced to the center, and that his popularity will enable him to rise to the occasion.

Christy said...

We really don't get a comprehensive view of the polling questions, just the results. Yesterday on one of the Sunday Morning Pundit shows (don't remember which, sorry,) some of the discussion was about Race and the Polls. Apparently the polls are designed to ferret out biases with questions about whether we feel we've ever been discriminated against and the like. I'm wondering if the tone deafness we all have to our own prejudices allowed questions which lead those responding to the "right" answer. Anyhow, that's what I'm pinning my hopes on for the next 36 hours. Sad, but true.

I'm inside the beltway of a city that saw violent race riots in the 60s. Carville's warnings have been on my mind.

Synova said...

Yeah, Erica Jong is an airhead, isn't she.

If it's well known that the polls are rigged... what does it mean if her guy WINS.

And she's trotting around Europe telling people who don't realize she's a moron, that blood will run in the streets if Obama loses?

Perhaps she figures that people who agree with her politics are just as irrational as she is. Emotional. Self-indulgent. Violent.

reader_iam said...

Sorry, McCain signs.

LOL.

Absolutely true, though, those descriptions, otherwise.

reader_iam said...

Palladian: In a weird way, you helped make my point, but I'm not sure you intended to.

: )

Darcy said...

Thank you, blogless. I appreciate your thoughts very much.

Unknown said...

reader_iam, that's interesting. I cannot say I have similar motivations. I don't believe riots will happen here in Austin. The only riot I'm aware of in recent Austin history was fomented in part by outsiders who were here for a big sporting event.

Original Mike said...

I'm counting on the market remaining down. I converted half my IRA to a Roth last Monday, and want to do the other half in 2009. So, I will raise a glass to President Obama tomorrow night.

walter neff said...

"Spake walter neff of Thee Internet."

I am not running for President.

KCFleming said...

Obama by 8?
Maybe, but it's hard to defeat voters that are fictitious or dead, who all seem to be voting in record numbers for Obama.

This has been the most fraudulent election ever, including the credit card fraud also by Obama.

If he indeed wins, I'll see no point in participating in the new banana republic, where the ruling Party sees no reason to hold honest elections. We might as well give Obama 99% of the vote like all socialists get everywhere else.

Goodbye Washington, Madison, and Hamilton.
Hello Lenin, Fidel, and Ayers.
It was a good 230 years.

I propose we call it The Peoples Democratic Republic of America, or some such meaningless tripe.

Synova said...

Basically, Jong says her fear that Obama might lose the election has developed into an "obsession. A paralyzing terror. An anxious fever that keeps you awake at night." She also says that her friends Jane Fonda and Naomi Wolf are extremely worried that Obama will be sabotaged by Republican dirty tricks, and that if an Obama loss indeed comes to pass, the result will be a second American Civil War.

Here's a translation of Jong's more spirited quotes to the Milan-based Corriere, as selected by Rocca.

"The record shows that voting machines in America are rigged."



"My friends Ken Follett and Susan Cheever are extremely worried. Naomi Wolf calls me every day. Yesterday, Jane Fonda sent me an email to tell me that she cried all night and can't cure her ailing back for all the stress that has reduces her to a bundle of nerves."

"My back is also suffering from spasms, so much so that I had to see an acupuncturist and get prescriptions for Valium."

"After having stolen the last two elections, the Republican Mafia…"

"If Obama loses it will spark the second American Civil War. Blood will run in the streets, believe me. And it's not a coincidence that President Bush recalled soldiers from Iraq for Dick Cheney to lead against American citizens in the streets."

"Bush has transformed America into a police state, from torture to the imprisonment of reporters, to the Patriot Act."



Granted... it's a bit hard to take Jane Fonda, Naomi Wolf, or Erica Jong seriously.

A person could write a whole comedy/farce from this passage alone, with Dick Cheney leading the soldiers against the citizens, all decked out like Rambo. And despite the fact that some people really do seem to live in this alternate universe... you couldn't sell it because you'd be condemned for having a simplistic and hateful view and no one could *really* be this deranged.

mccullough said...

The West Side of Chicago will burn regardless of whether Obama wins or loses. The people there live wretched lives and are ignorant and illiterate.

Six Bulls championships in the '90s made the place look like Detroit. Hopefully (and probably) the media won't cover it (if Obama wins) because it makes inner-city blacks look bad.

Obama's presidency will be fine. Any tough times we face will be blamed on W. and the Republicans and the media will comply.

8% unemployment -- W.'s fault.

Stagnant GDP -- W.'s fault.

Quagmire in Afghanistan -- W.'s fault.

When U.S. soldiers get killed in the Congo and Sudan as part of "peacekeeping" the media won't make a big deal of it. They'll focus on the horrendous genocide there, not the needless deaths of U.S. soldiers involved in an intractable and horrendous situation.

When the number of births out of wedlock continue to rise as they have, Obama will not face any tough questions.

When more money gets thrown at failing education programs that will still fail, people will say that it's too soon to tell.

When Obama squashes all the federal investigations in Chicago because they hit too close to home, no one will say anything.

Obama will get a pass, just like he has througout his career.

We'll still have the same problems, though, with no solutions.

Thankfully, the national media is in a tailspin because they are unsuccessful corporations. They have bloated payrolls and put out an inferior product.

If people want to make money during an Obama presidency, just keep selling these companies' stocks short (New York Times Co., Washington Post. Co., etc.).

walter neff said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Simon said...

Synova said...
"Yeah, Erica Jong is an airhead, isn't she."

If they start one, it'd be the shortest damned civil war in history. One side voluntarily disarmed years ago.

"If it's well known that the polls are rigged... what does it mean if her guy WINS."

Well, that's exactly it, isn't it. Greg Palast and idiots of that ilk have already been writing pieces saying that the election is rigged - so, if Obama wins, perhaps McCain's supporters should turn around and insist that the election was so obviously rigged that even idiots like Greg Palast have admitted that it was rigged? Look to those Palast articles to disappear down the memory hole if early returns look favorable.

walter neff said...

Cheer up Pogo.

Much like Mayor Dinkins, the upcoming Obama presidency will be so inept that he will make George Bush look like Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln all rolled into one.

Two years in we will see a newspaper headline shouting "Barack Do Something."

He will not have the option of voting present.

chuck b. said...

"I'm going to repeat a question I asked the other day which went unanswered: How many of the people here who predict violence to break out in the wake of the election actually live in neighborhoods in which they expect violence to take place?"

I live in San Francisco's second most liberal voting district. Just visiting here could cause some of you to sizzle and burn.

I would not expect violence in my neighborhood, but I would not be surprised if some windows get smashed downtown. Car windows, especially.

Anonymous said...

My money (not my preference) is on Obama.

Should he lose, my money (not my preference) is on riots.

When your "politics" come down to fairy tales, you can believe in black magic rigged elections pretty easily. Or would it be white magic?

I'm Full of Soup said...

I predict too that an Obama presidency will be like a Dinkins term.

Great expectations but just plain incompetence. It will open the way for a Rudy type.

Triangle Man said...

walter neff said...

Much like Mayor Dinkins, the upcoming Obama prescidency will be so inept that he will make George Bush look like Washington, Jefferson and Lincoln all rolled into one.


What exactly is it that you think Obama has in common with Dinkins?

Palladian said...

"What exactly is it that you think Obama has in common with Dinkins?"

Translation: RACIST!!!!!!1

Still, it's an unfair comparison. Dinkins had far more experience being corrupt and incompetent than Obama does. Yet.

reader_iam said...

The only riot I'm aware of in recent Austin history was fomented in part by outsiders who were here for a big sporting event.

I love that sentence.

walter neff said...

"What exactly is it that you think Obama has in common with Dinkins?"


Both were classy and dignified black machine politicians of an extremely liberal bent who were elected principally because of white liberal quilt, total support of the media, the overwhelming support of their own tribe and a sense that it was “time.” Both had no significant accomplishments to speak of and deep associations with dubious political players who they immediately disavowed when these associations came to light. Both were given every benefit of the doubt and forgiven transgressions that would have sunk the career of any other politician.

I do presume that Senator Obama has of course filed all of his tax returns. So that is the one significant difference.

Palladian said...

"...her fear that Obama might lose the election has developed into an "obsession. A paralyzing terror. An anxious fever that keeps you awake at night."

"My friends Ken Follett and Susan Cheever are extremely worried. Naomi Wolf calls me every day. Yesterday, Jane Fonda sent me an email to tell me that she cried all night and can't cure her ailing back for all the stress that has reduces her to a bundle of nerves."

"My back is also suffering from spasms, so much so that I had to see an acupuncturist and get prescriptions for Valium."

LOL. Is it only liberals who have these kind of problems? Is there even one McCain supporter here so "paralyzed" with terror about the prospect of McCain losing that they sit around and cry and call their friends and have "back spasms" and go to charlata... I mean, acupuncturists and pop Valium? Why are liberals so pathetic and so prone to ridiculous melodrama?

Dust Bunny Queen said...

MCG and DBQ: OK, but then what's the point of saying that, other then to release a bogeyman (and yes, I refuse use that extra "o," damn it!!)?.

Merely pointing out the obvious. As someone already said, even victory celebrations turn violent and ugly. If Obama should lose, it will be very ugly. And as to Doyle or Downtownlad, (can't really tell the difference) just because I don't live in an urban area now, doesn't mean that I am not familiar with how things work in the "cities".

I grew up in the Bay and lived in SF proper for many years. I know how it is and what will happen in some areas. Fact.

walter neff said...

Also David Dinkins had served as City Clerk in a patronage job for many years so he had experience in filling out forms such as birth certificates and marriage licenses.

Also, I don't think Obama likes tennis.

So they are somewhat different. I just fear that the results will be much the same.

Brian Doyle said...

Palladian, sarcastically defending Walter Neff:

Translation: RACIST!!!!!!1

Walter Neff, defending himself:

Both were classy and dignified black machine politicians of an extremely liberal bent who were elected principally because of white liberal quilt

Next time, Pal, wait a few comments.

Palladian said...

Can I say it now?

RACIST!!!!!111one

Palladian said...

I like that. I'm going to start shouting it at anyone and everyone who bothers me or disagrees with me in any way.

RACIST!!!!

walter neff said...

Facts do not need defending. Save it for when the Iranians start to "vent."

Brian Doyle said...

I'm going to start shouting it at anyone and everyone who bothers me or disagrees with me in any way.

Even better, you could start bleating it in a continuing effort to insulate racist speech from criticism.

El Presidente said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Palladian said...

"Even better, you could start bleating it in a continuing effort to insulate racist speech from criticism."


RACIST!!!!!

Brian Doyle said...

Keep it up long enough maybe you'll achieve your lifelong dream of being able to call black people n----rs.

El Presidente said...

Worrying about racism. Wasn't that a topic on the Stuff White People Like website?

Bradley Effect n.- Urban legend that help white liberals feel better about themselves.

Unknown said...

I love that sentence.

Not sure what exactly you mean by that (an all-too-uncommon problem with the Internet). But unless you know about Austin sports minutae, I don't think you could guess which sporting event (or even which sport) I'm referring to.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

"who were elected principally because of white liberal quilt"

White quilts are difficult to maintain. So easily stained.

I'm Full of Soup said...

Doyle:

Please be more explicit re Walter's alleged racist words.

Palladian said...

"Keep it up long enough maybe you'll achieve your lifelong dream of being able to call black people n----rs."

Oh fuck off, asswipe. Maybe this kind of 8th grade psychological manipulation works on the kind of people you associate with but it doesn't work on me.

reader_iam said...

Palladian: That Jong article was a piece of work, all right, and a real hoot. When I posted about it the other day, the quote you reference was the title, though it was only my second favorite quote in the translated article.

Palladian said...

Doyle hates women. Did everyone know that? I mean, since the rules seem to allow baseless accusations of bigotry, I think it's time we all try it.

Darcy said...

Well, Palladian, I've stocked up on dirty martini ingredients, but that's about it. But even that was kind of fun. :) Jalapeño or regular pimento suffed olives? Grey Goose?

And I'm sleeping just fine.

Palladian said...

"When I posted about it the other day, the quote you reference was the title, though it was only my second favorite quote in the translated article."

Wait... does Jong consider herself the replacement of Norman Mailer? What?!

Too many jims said...

Simon said...
Latinos are overwhelmingly Catholic; this makes them a natural conservative constituency.


I suspect you are saying that catholics are "a natural conservative constituency" is largely based on the abortion issue and other cultural issues. I think you overstate how well Catholics fit as a natural conservative constituency. I am pretty sure that Clinton won the Catholic vote (both times), Gore won the catholic vote narrowly in 2000, and Bush won the Catholic vote in 2004. More importantly, I really don't think latinos fit naturally as a conservative constituency notwithstanding their agreement with Republicans on many social issues. With the notable exception of Cuban latinos, my guess is that latinos tend to be more statist and pro-labor than would ordinarily fit well into the conservative fold.

That said, your broader point as I took it (i.e. the Republican party needs to find a way to not antagonize latinos and bring enough of them into the fold) is well put.

garage mahal said...

Obama by 8?
Maybe, but it's hard to defeat voters that are fictitious or dead, who all seem to be voting in record numbers for Obama.


Really!? That would be quite a scoop. Have any links to that you could share?

Palladian said...

"Well, Palladian, I've stocked up on dirty martini ingredients, but that's about it. But even that was kind of fun. :) Jalapeño or regular pimento suffed olives? Grey Goose?"

Ha. Well whoever wins, I'm downing one of my bottles of 30 year old Laphroaig scotch tomorrow night. What better way to celebrate or mourn (or both) than to quaff a single malt born during the nadir of the Carter administration?

reader_iam said...

You know, maybe there will be violence, and maybe there won't be. It's just my perception that its spectre is being raised more often by people who wouldn't themselves be in the line of fire, so to speak, and therefore I have to wonder what the motivation is, especially given the tone (OK, perceived tone) of at least some of the speculations. Just as I did about the queries/comments I received in IRL. And now I'll leave this part of the discussion (at least I think).

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Ha. Well whoever wins, I'm downing one of my bottles of 30 year old Laphroaig scotch tomorrow night. What better way to celebrate or mourn (or both) than to quaff a single malt born during the nadir of the Carter administration?

Now you're talking.

Actually, we will probably not be watching much television or election coverage, merely to preserve our sanity. Maybe the Princess Bride is in order, or Singing in the Rain. Two movies that constantly cheer me up.

garage mahal said...

Awwwwww.

Darcy said...

Cheers, Palladian. :)

Maybe this will lighten the mood here? I have to admit, it's catchy!

Brian Doyle said...

If I had my druthers, Bush supporters would be strapped into their chairs, eyelids held open mechanically, Clockwork Orange-style, and forced to watch the whole evening of election coverage... MSNBC's election coverage.

MadisonMan said...

I grew up in the Bay and lived in SF proper for many years. I know how it is and what will happen in some areas. Fact.

So we can say, then, that any celebration that turns ugly is just more of the same. Sounds like blaming Bush though.

Unknown said...

Damnit, this is the song I had hoped someone would overlay with "Spread the Wealth Around" :)

walter neff said...

Stating facts about the similarities between the failed mayoralty of David Dinkins and the upcoming failed Presidency of Barack Obama is of course racist.
To state that they are elegant and dignified ciphers that so many have poured their adoration into a deeply flawed vessel is of course racist. To state that neither had a single accomplishment to merit their election is of course racist. To criticize or otherwise doubt the abilities of either based on their past history, statements, behavior and associations is course racist.

Get used to it. You will have four long years of it to look forward to such intelligent ripostes.

MadisonMan said...

By the way, if you do choose Singing in the Rain (an excellent choice) -- pay attention to Gene Kelly's famous dance scene and ask yourself: If there's such a rain falling in Southern California at the end of March, why is there no wind? Every time I've been in southern Cal and a big rainstorm has hit, the wind has been ferocious, yet there he is dancing (and singing) in the rain -- with no wind. Hollywood got it wrong, just saying.

chickelit said...

Obama is already beneath contempt here and here.

David said...

The Polls will not mislead us. The Russians or the French or the Jordanians or even the Israelis, but never the Polls.

Unknown said...

Oh, geez, not another faux flipoff moment.

Brian Doyle said...

Get used to it. You will have four long years of it to look forward to such intelligent ripostes.

What's funny is that you omit the "white guilt" factor from your self-pitying. Why? Aren't you claiming that their brown skin was their key to victory?

Dust Bunny Queen said...

It's just my perception that its spectre is being raised more often by people who wouldn't themselves be in the line of fire, so to speak, and therefore I have to wonder what the motivation is, especially given the tone

Reader, I'm certainly not hoping for or rooting for violence or riots. In fact, it would be a wonderful thing if people would accept the win or loss gracefully and hope and pray for the best and cooperate to accomplish the work of government. (Unlike the liberals did with Bush, where they began viciously attacking him at every turn before he was even inaugurated and stonewalled his appointments)

However, my faith in human nature is such that I would not be surprised if win or lose there isn't some property damage at the very least.

bleeper said...

Doyle - typical liberal - wants to torture those with whom he disagrees. Take it down a notch, chill, no need to get ahead of yourself.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 323   Newer› Newest»