Memeorandum


Powered by TypePad

« Where's The Lefty Traffic? (I Blame Dick Cheney) | Main | Happy New Year »

December 31, 2007

Comments

Jane

I second those opinions.

And Fred continues to impress.

I am very disappointed in Fox News these days however.

clarice

I'm glad to hear that Beldar has joined the Forse. And that TM has not lost his characteristic rosy optimism.

clarice

**ForCe*****(and the antispam crap is back!!)

centralcal

Re: Fox News -- me too, Jane!

SunnyDay

Fox is a total disappointment when it comes to equal coverage. A Fred win would be a deadly blow to the current media/PR machine that thinks it picks our candidates and decides our votes.

Since Fred won't play with them, they either ignore him completely, or make things up about him. Hopefully, the relatively new ability to take things directly to the people - will triumph over the spin machines.

Something has to give - the process is a joke.

GMax

I am not sure in the current environment that a landslide is possible in either direction. I suppose if Ron Paul or maybe even Huckaboob got the Republican nomination, that even Republicans could stay home to sway an election greatly. Otherwise there is about 40% that will vote for whomever is the party standard bearer of their respective side. The remaining muddle of 18- 19 % ( assuming that the various fringes get 1 to 2 % cumulatively) have to nearly break all one way or the other for it not be a very close election.

I dont see the Democrats base staying home, you got lefty, leftier and leftiest running. Not anything approaching a centrist candidate anywhere in the top three.

And since Hillary might be the most centrist ( laugh that I even typed that ) of the bunch, is generally seen to be ahead comfortably nationally and has 49% negative that mean they will absolute vote for ABC, I dont see how you get to a Dem landslide. Remember that since Nixon, the Dem have a highwater mark of 50.1% and that was one election after the biggest modern scandal in the Presidency history.

centralcal

Speaking of the press picking and deciding . . . I was taking down Christmas decorations when a nearly foaming at the mouth (he was so excited) Carl Cameron reported on the stunt Huckster pulled in a room crammed with the press.

They (the media) floated Huckster's boat, but he keeps pulling the plug and letting the water out of the bathtub.

Anyway, his latest phony ploy about showing his "attack" ad and then saying he wasn't going to air it after all, simply accentuates the pure dishonesty of this man. And, he had already provided the ad to TV stations and just hopes (snicker) they get the memo in time not to run it.

good grief!

GMax

BTW

The NYT has a fawning article on Bloomberg flirting with a 3rd party run. Early in it they mention a meeting in Oklahoma, being organized by David Boren and Sam Nunn. The NYT calls this a bipartisan meeting, but never lets on to its readers that both Boren and Nunn are former Democrat Senators from Southern or Western states. The only Republican mentioned in the article is Chuck Hagel. He is said to be "invited" which likely means he wont be in attendance either.

If Bloomberg runs, he will pull moderate Democrats and Democrat leaning independents very heavily. He is not a Republican despite him having changed his registration to find an easier path to the Mayor's office. And he has now renounced his Republicanness publicly. He should worry Hill a great deal.

centralcal

Mark Helperin link with my name below, pretty much describes how the media honestly reacted to the Huckster's latest huckaroni.

Of course, they will all play the attack ad on tonite's newscasts (free air time, doncha know). ah jeez.

Semanticleo

You agree with.....

"I'm convinced that the GOP's chances are at least as good as his were in 2000 or 2004"

with the caveat....

"To which I will add - the Republicans could lose this in a landslide, too."

Dizzyingly risky , Maguire.

reliapundit@msn.com

there's no doubt that fred is a good conservative.

but....

he abandoned his post in 2002 - by leaving the senate in war-time --- while the senate was very closely held.

he left to do what?

tv.

this in not the character of someone we need as a war-time POTUS.

end. of. story.

clarice

I believe he left because his daughter had just died..and probably for the same reason Nunn left as well--it ain't what it used to be and no sentient person can long endure it.

Rick

"...it ain't what it used to be and no sentient person can long endure it."

Especially when you consider Robert Byrd, but I repeat yourself.

Cordially...

SunnyDay

He had committed to *only* stay in office for two terms.

Are you posting thsi tripe on every board?

sbw

"he abandoned his post in 2002 - by leaving the senate in war-time"

Horse-hockey. But worth a good laugh.

sbw

To be successful, Fred does need to hone the message finer, to drill through the ennui. Something larger than a sound bite and smaller than an evening's entertainment.

It's important, and it can be done.

Ann

The smartest woman in the world. Yeah Right!

Ms. Hillary does Pakistan

JM Hanes

GMax

"....I dont see how you get to a Dem landslide."

Well, maybe this will help. I don't believe in not casting a vote, and I'd vote for Hillary before I'd ever vote for Huckabee, which is really saying something.

On the Bloomberg conclave, the WaPo mentions John Danforth & Christie Todd Whitman sharing (Republican) organizational honors with Yuck Hagel. It also includes a list of folks who apparently plan to attend from both sides of the aisle. I always thought Whitman had a lot of potential & was really disappointed to see her so brutally -- and publicly -- sidelined early on by BushCo. Hagel is like poison with ambitions, IMO.

bio mom

When interviewed last night just before the ball fell in Times Square, Bloomberg answered that he is NOT running for president.

clarice

That's a relief! Besides his mom who'd vote for him.(Ditto with Hagel)

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame