Althouse: "We're not here to husband our poll numbers like a trophy on a shelf."

December 18, 2009

"We're not here to husband our poll numbers like a trophy on a shelf."

Wacky quote by David Axelrod, who is "not professionally qualified to judge insanity."

35 comments:

Scott said...: Okay, so how could we help Karl Rove's doppelganger unmix that metaphor?

Hmmm...

...husbandry, like animal husbandry?

"We're not here to husband our numbers like a prize cow."

... or trophies ...

"We're not here to polish our poll numbers like a trophy on a shelf."

I dunno.

(wv: forsince); 12/18/09, 9:39 AM
Expat(ish) said...: Is he "spending his political capital?"

First we thought we had Kennedy, then it looked all Carter, then we got LBJ, and now we have Bush?

Truly, a man for all seasons.

-XC; 12/18/09, 9:43 AM
Anonymous said...: Given the egos of Rahm and Obama, I imagine that they actually do "husband" trophies they have received. They probably have books of portraits of themselves with the pages stuck together.; 12/18/09, 9:45 AM
Chip Ahoy said...: Husband = polish, or better yet dust, as in dust the old trophies that remind one of earlier accomplishments. I'm starting to warm up to this Axelrod guy, he's a wonderful source of quotes.; 12/18/09, 10:12 AM
Anonymous said...: Or how about husband = trophy? Why should blonde women in their 20s married to investment bankers in their 50s have all the fun?; 12/18/09, 10:18 AM
former law student said...: Team Obama would rather not sacrifice universal health care for a little temporary popularity.; 12/18/09, 10:26 AM
Anonymous said...: fls,

I don't think there is any actual bill on the table that provides for universal health care. Can you point me to one?; 12/18/09, 10:33 AM
former law student said...: I don't think there is any actual bill on the table that provides for universal health care

Really? Which part of the population do the House and Senate bills leave out?; 12/18/09, 10:39 AM
Henry said...: The comments are enjoyable.; 12/18/09, 10:47 AM
Unknown said...: And I have some swamp land in Arizona to sell them in return. Any administration has to watch its poll numbers if it wants to move its agenda forward in Congress and have support for its foreign policy.

former law student said...

Team Obama would rather not sacrifice universal health care for a little temporary popularity.

No, ObambiCare is all about power. If you think altruism is involved here, I suggest you watch the Brian DePalma version of, "The Untouchables", especially Big Al's dinner party for the boys.; 12/18/09, 11:14 AM
Anonymous said...: You've switched the burden. Please point to any current bill, or any discussion of any current, bill that says it provides for universal coverage.

You are the one who stated that Obama and Emanuel are sacrificing Obama's popularity to achieve universal health care. I asssumed that you wouldn't have based that statement on blind, uninformed faith, so you must know the answer, right?; 12/18/09, 11:18 AM
Roger J. said...: I am guessing they don't want to call a spade a spade, nor be niggardly with their poll numbers.; 12/18/09, 11:32 AM
Kansas City said...: Why is a guy like Axelrod in an important policy position where what he says about health care is of any significance?

I suppose it has often been true that campaign consultants get White House jobs, but it seems like Axelrod has a more prominent and public role. Why is he taken seriously?; 12/18/09, 11:35 AM
Roger J. said...: BTW--as T-man says, precisely WHAT bill is on the floor for vote--the only one I have seen cited is the one in Harry Reid's office--The bottom line is NO one has ANY idea what the final bill will say until, god forbid, it is passed--; 12/18/09, 11:36 AM
traditionalguy said...: Axelrod sounds like he is a true believer in the Great Acts done to change history theory of leadership. He is also signaling that Obama and him don't plan winning re-election. Now why is that?; 12/18/09, 11:50 AM
Anonymous said...: BTW why was it a horrible intrusion of politics into policy when Karl Rove was in the WH, and completely okey dokey with Axelrod there?; 12/18/09, 12:42 PM
Anonymous said...: *chirp*

Keep looking fls, but don't expect to find anything.; 12/18/09, 1:10 PM
vbspurs said...: BTW why was it a horrible intrusion of politics into policy when Karl Rove was in the WH, and completely okey dokey with Axelrod there?

A) Because Karl Rove is a Republican
B) Because Karl Rove is a white male
C) Because Karl Rove is just evil
D) All of the above

And don't forget, he helped a born-again Christian get into power. There's a special place in Democratic hell for born-again Christian Texan Republicans.; 12/18/09, 1:59 PM
veni vidi vici said...: It's clear Obama is on the prepuce of achievement.

wv: "lixed" -- no kidding. mix with Bols gin.; 12/18/09, 2:16 PM
Scott said...: I just looked up "prepuce".

Obama is on the foreskin of an achievement?

Smegma-like, no doubt.

Eww.; 12/18/09, 2:30 PM
Eric said...: Really? Which part of the population do the House and Senate bills leave out?

There is no Senate bill. They're not done writing it yet.; 12/18/09, 3:15 PM
former law student said...: I looked for a left-handed lesbian loophole, but didn't find any. Generally exceptions to the general rule are made quite obvious, but obviously you know better.

he helped a born-again Christian get into power.

Yes, by telling the good people of South Carolina that John McCain (rev. 2K) had sired a pickaninny. Hey, whatever it takes to get elected, right?; 12/18/09, 3:44 PM
veni vidi vici said...: There was a small town near where I grew up, named Puce. We used to joke that as one approached the town, you'd be at the prePuce.

Yeah, that's a terrifically pungent 'n spongy word. Well mated to the "precipice of achievement" bollocks from the other post this morning.

wv: "mulat" -- do something with that god-awful hair, will ya?; 12/18/09, 4:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Rather than looking for left-handed lesbians, you might have just looked for articles bemoaning the fact that even the house bill, under the most optimistic scenarios, will leave about 25 million (which probably includes right handed lesbians) without health insurance.

I'm sure that would just hurt your head, though and make it hard to keep on believing. If you really didn't know these things, you are woefully uninformed.; 12/18/09, 4:15 PM
Phil 314 said...: fls;
Really? Which part of the population do the House and Senate bills leave out?

I believe the analysis for both bills suggest they will get significantly toward full coverage of the populace but not complete. (No citations here, sorry)

I assume similar to the MassHealth experience. That's not meant to downplay the signficance of increased percentage of the population now covered, its just not 100%; 12/18/09, 4:23 PM
Anonymous said...: LOL, victoria!

I forgot--Karl Rove is Satan.; 12/18/09, 5:44 PM
Eric said...: First we thought we had Kennedy, then it looked all Carter, then we got LBJ, and now we have Bush?

I'm not sure he's going to stop before he gets to Nixon. Or maybe Harding.; 12/18/09, 7:17 PM
Alex said...: FLS - you don't get to redefine "universal health care" to suddenly mean that everyone has health insurance. UHC = single payer like in the UK. Stop spinning.; 12/18/09, 7:25 PM
former law student said...: UHC = single payer like in the UK.

Kindly inform Holland, Germany, Switzerland, and Israel, that they do not have universal health care for their residents -- because they think they do, somehow. It might be because every resident is covered, one way or another, but none of them have "single-payer."; 12/18/09, 7:42 PM
Alex said...: FLS - nice try but if you read Huffington Post it's all about single-payer or nothing.; 12/18/09, 7:46 PM
Expat(ish) said...: Hmm, as one of the (probably few) people here who have lived in both the UK and Australia I can assure you that coverage without access to doctors and medicines and procedures is not quite the rainbow/unicorn/skittle experience you may think it is.

Personally, while I wish poor people had good access to top quality medical care to help them care for their blood pressure or diabetes, I also know that taking a system from 85% coverage to 95% coverage is very difficult and expensive. And possibly impossible.

Everyone out there who works for a big company or organization - how well do you optimize?

Yep.

-XC; 12/18/09, 9:20 PM
kentuckyliz said...: In the precipice of achievement blogpost from yesterday, combox:

Blogger kentuckyliz said...

the prepuce of achievement
12/17/09 11:31 PM; 12/18/09, 11:21 PM
kentuckyliz said...: ^ just about exactly 24 hours ago!!!; 12/18/09, 11:22 PM
former law student said...: I also know that taking a system from 85% coverage to 95% coverage is very difficult and expensive. And possibly impossible.

If the Frogs can do it, surely we can do it. Have some patriotic pride, man! We're better than those cheese eating surrender monkeys.

And part of being a free American is never having to read the Huffington Post.; 12/19/09, 7:28 AM
kentuckyliz said...: Speaking of foreskins.

Hey fls, how ya doin'?; 12/19/09, 12:40 PM