Super Tuesday 2! Election primary 08

[jess]

Edwards seems a really poor choice for VP to Obama to me (and this coming from someone who supported him for Pres). He lacks experience, which is the biggest thing Obama needs in a VP, and he's too far left. He's going to need a more conservative, experienced VP to beat McCain. I'd like to see Edwards as Attorney General or the like maybe though.

[davy]

i've still got some research to do on them, but so far i think my two top choices would be jim webb or bill bradley.

edit: i thought i'd heard bradley's name dropped into this discussion already, but now i can't find any sources. so maybe that really is just wishful thinking.

[hannah]

Yeah, Bradley is totally wishful thinking on my part.

[dieblucasdie]

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/sleuth/2008/03/sinbad_unloads_on_hillary_clin.html

As if this race isn't absurd enough.

Make it stop.

[Wally]

Make it stop.

The closest to perfection this thread has ever got.

[FreddyKnuckles]

ahhhhhhh hahahaha

[Andrew_TSKS]

Yeah, Bradley is totally wishful thinking on my part.

bradley's an obama backer. also, i saw him on one of the tv news shows recently taking obama's back on the subject of superdelegates. at least, i think that's what he was on there talking about. it was either that or campaign ethics. but so yeah, who knows? it's not out of the realm of possibility, or at least i don't think so.

[slow west vultures]

i've still got some research to do on them, but so far i think my two top choices would be jim webb or bill bradley.

edit: i thought i'd heard bradley's name dropped into this discussion already, but now i can't find any sources. so maybe that really is just wishful thinking.

they'd make one hell of a pick n' roll combo for sure.  mccain and running mate would have no chance on the basketball court. 

both wolf blitzer and jack cafferty repeated at least once their opinion that sinbad is a funny guy today when i was watching cnn and they covered that story. 

[hannah]

I'd gladly, gladly eat my words on this one, but Bradley wouldn't help Obama shake charges of elitism. He may be from MO but he was educated in NJ, played for NY, and was a NJ senator. Also, his relative pinko-ness not going to help Obama appeal to conservos. I, meanwhile, will keep on using bad slang.

[Andrew_TSKS]

so uh, how about those insane ferraro comments? right now i'm still having trouble believing it actually happened, like i'll wake up in the morning and start talking to people about it and they'll be like "no no, andrew, that's a really vivid dream you had last night. geraldine ferraro didn't say those things."

[Andrew_TSKS]

oh, and olbermann announced tonight that tomorrow he'll have a special comment on clinton's campaign. i guess the ferraro racebaiting was too much for him.

for those who haven't heard, by the way, this is what i'm referring to.

[Antero]

so uh, how about those insane ferraro comments? right now i'm still having trouble believing it actually happened, like i'll wake up in the morning and start talking to people about it and they'll be like "no no, andrew, that's a really vivid dream you had last night. geraldine ferraro didn't say those things."

Yeah, holy shit.

I have this feeling like one day all of Washington is suddenly going to pull a Kramer, have a nervous breakdown, and just shout "niggerniggerniggernigger" at the top of their lungs for, like, a week.

[FreddyKnuckles]

the best his her response

[Andrew_TSKS]

if by best you mean for sheer "holy fucking shit i can't BELIEVE she said that"-ness, i agree.

[elpollodiablo]

""And both of us have had supporters and staff members who've gone over the line and we have to rein them in and try to keep this on the issues.""

I'd say that's about right, though. I mean that woman is a fucking crank, for sure, but both campaigns have been showing their fair share of cranks recently.

[elpollodiablo]

Oh man, Sinbad! SNAP

[elpollodiablo]

By the by, they're saying Obama won Texas, now. Guess I'd better get ready to board the hope train!


And no, I'm not being sarcastic

[davy]

so uh, how about those insane ferraro comments? right now i'm still having trouble believing it actually happened, like i'll wake up in the morning and start talking to people about it and they'll be like "no no, andrew, that's a really vivid dream you had last night. geraldine ferraro didn't say those things."

what gets me about this is not only what she said originally. it's not only the way she underscored her comments later in the day ("i feel like i'm being attacked because i'm white")...it's not only the fact that she then added a snarky "how's that?" to those comments...

it's that when obama and axelrod responded--saying the comments were absurd and had no place in american politics--clinton's campaign tried to BLAME THEM FOR BRINGING RACE BACK INTO THE DEBATE!

AGHAHGAHGHAG

[Andrew_TSKS]

oh and by the way, check this out:

The cite is an April 15, 1988 Washington Post story (byline: Howard Kurtz), available only on Nexis.

Here's the full context:

Placid of demeanor but pointed in his rhetoric, Jackson struck out repeatedly today against those who suggest his race has been an asset in the campaign. President Reagan suggested Tuesday that people don't ask Jackson tough questions because of his race. And former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."

[davy]

at least she's consistent.

[Andrew_TSKS]

By the by, they're saying Obama won Texas, now. Guess I'd better get ready to board the hope train!

the deal here is that the caucus, which obama won by i think 7%, counts for 35% of the delegates, while the primary, which hillary won by 3%, counts for 65% of the delegates. so hillary still won the primary, but because obama's win in the caucus was by more points, he ends up netting more delegates from the state than hillary.

[elpollodiablo]

Yes, that's exactly the deal

[elpollodiablo]

The boldness of that generation of women, who were facing obstacles and prejudices far greater than today's, makes me impatient with the reactionary whining one hears from establishment feminists, including Steinem, about the supposedly still-crippling pervasiveness of sexism.

Sigh. Oh, Camille.


Full text link below; she makes a couple good points but ends up sounding more shrill and unreasoned than HC could ever dream of. 

http://www.salon.com/opinion/paglia/2008/03/12/red_phone/index.html

[elpollodiablo]

LOL, she continues: Movie stars ain't what they used to be; the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue isn't sexy anymore; the French are just naturally superior in their sexuality and grace; those damn kids today, etc.

Nothing like a crabby aging bombthrower who's lost her relevancy.

I guess this is in the wrong thread, but whatever

[auto-da-fey]

I think the only thing I disagree with there is the implication--probably not intended, I'm guessing--that she ever had relevance.

Though I gotta admit, that old essay where she calls poststructuralism the crack cocaine of academia, stupidly reactionary as it was, does make me smile.

(edit: by "there" I mean pollo's post, not Paglia's column, which I read once when it first returned a while back and never plan to read again)