17
   

Get yer polls, bets, numbers & pretty graphs! Elections 2008

 
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 08:11 am
OK. Well were you talking to me with this, then?:

Quote:
To people like joefromchicago, blatham, and nimh, this story isn't telling anything they didn't know already. To those in this thread who're in love with Obama like gushing teenagers, no amount of facts will give them a realistic perspective.


Because that's what I was responding to.

And really I don't think anyone here is "in love with Obama like a gushing teenager." Roxxxanne tends to broad and enthusiastic endorsements of those she supports and denunciations of those she doesn't support. But I wouldn't call snood or anyone else here a gushing teenager.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 08:17 am
sozobe wrote:
And really I don't think anyone here is "in love with Obama like a gushing teenager." Roxxxanne tends to broad and enthusiastic endorsements of those she supports and denunciations of those she doesn't support. But I wouldn't call snood or anyone else here a gushing teenager.

I, too, tend to broad and enthusiastic statements of my thoughts. Maybe "gushing teenagers" and "no amount of facts" was too broad and too enthusiastic. But yes, I think that neither you, not snood, nor "anyone else", is overly receptive to inconvenient facts about Obama anymore. (I also expect that you and I would pretty much agree on the list of those who fall under "anybody else".)
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 08:19 am
inserting a thought that troubles me...

I was listening to MSNBC yesterday and whatever revolving panel of talking heads was on air at the time was reviewing polling outcomes and voting outcomes of various subsets of the population.

They used the word "down-scale" so many times that I quickly realized that we have a new sector in American society. The "down-scales". Is this just an MSNBCism or have we marginalized an entire sector of society with a PC label?
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 08:24 am
Thomas wrote:
sozobe wrote:
And really I don't think anyone here is "in love with Obama like a gushing teenager." Roxxxanne tends to broad and enthusiastic endorsements of those she supports and denunciations of those she doesn't support. But I wouldn't call snood or anyone else here a gushing teenager.

I, too, tend to broad and enthusiastic statements of my thoughts. Maybe "gushing teenagers" and "no amount of facts" was too broad and too enthusiastic. But yes, I think that neither you, not snood, nor "anyone else", is overly receptive to inconvenient facts about Obama anymore. (I also expect that you and I would pretty much agree on the list of those who fall under "anybody else".)


PS, before Cycloptichorn gets up and calls me an Obama hater: I have no problem at all with the proposition that there are X regular politicians in the race, and that Obama is the best choice among them. In fact, I believe this myself, and have repeatedly said so in this thread and elsewhere. What I take issue with is usually-rational, usually-skeptical people who accept this whole talk of "change", "hope", "changing the tone in Washington", etc., as anything more than campaign slogans.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 08:27 am
JPB wrote:
They used the word "down-scale" so many times that I quickly realized that we have a new sector in American society. The "down-scales". Is this just an MSNBCism or have we marginalized an entire sector of society with a PC label?

They use it a lot on CNN, too.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 08:29 am
Then allow me to go on record that I find it extremely condescending.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 08:31 am
sozobe wrote:
He's not saying "no."

He's also not saying: "Yes, I do pledge to stay within the public system -- after Mr McCain and I have crossed the "i"s and dotted the "t"s. If he's still committed to staying in the public system, that would have been a much stronger way to say it.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 08:32 am
JPB wrote:
Then allow me to go on record that I find it extremely condescending.

Maybe their sense of their own importance has gotten to their talking heads; I would approve of downsizing it myself.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 08:32 am
Thomas wrote:
sozobe wrote:
And really I don't think anyone here is "in love with Obama like a gushing teenager." Roxxxanne tends to broad and enthusiastic endorsements of those she supports and denunciations of those she doesn't support. But I wouldn't call snood or anyone else here a gushing teenager.

I, too, tend to broad and enthusiastic statements of my thoughts. Maybe "gushing teenagers" and "no amount of facts" was too broad and too enthusiastic. But yes, I think that neither you, not snood, nor "anyone else", is overly receptive to inconvenient facts about Obama anymore. (I also expect that you and I would pretty much agree on the list of those who fall under "anybody else".)


OK, well that's how I took it, and why I referred to my post where my points a) and b) are acceptance of inconvenient facts. I have mixed feelings -- blatham, who you put on the "getting it" side of things, has said that he would throw yucky things at Obama if he rejects public financing. But yes, I took it as an agreement at the time, and I am disappointed in that aspect.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 08:37 am
sozobe wrote:
OK, well that's how I took it, and why I referred to my post where my points a) and b) are acceptance of inconvenient facts. I have mixed feelings -- blatham, who you put on the "getting it" side of things, has said that he would throw yucky things at Obama if he rejects public financing. But yes, I took it as an agreement at the time, and I am disappointed in that aspect.

Acknowledged. Does it affect your general perception of the hope, change, and integrity vision thing?
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 08:50 am
sorry... continuing with my rant on population sectors.

Quote:
Steven Thomma, writer for McClatchy Newspapers, wrote an article on Feb. 1. He wrote about what type of voter Democratic presidential candidates' Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton attract.

Here's a quote from the newspaper:

"Hers is older women, downscale whites and Latinos. His is young people, affluent whites and blacks."

Thomma said downscale whites is not a pejorative term.

"It's shorthand for economic standing and education," Thomma said. "The term matches exit polling. By definition downscale whites make between $15 and $30,000 and didn't complete high school."

Larry Gerston, NBC11 political analyst and San Jose State University professor, admits he's never heard the term downscale whites.

"If I had to define it, it would mean whites that are usually blue collar and lower on the economic scale or less educated." Gerston said. "Downscale whites are similar to soccer moms and suburbanites."

NBC11 News reporter Cheryl Hurd asked him why use the term at all.

"We try to get past the maze of faces when we look at why things happen in politics." Gerston said. "Recently downscale whites have been with the Clinton campaign. On Super Tuesday we saw signs lower income males were graviting toward Obama source
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 09:02 am
JPB wrote:
sorry... continuing with my rant on population sectors.

How dare you! In a thread about polls of all things!

Quote:
Thomma said downscale whites is not a pejorative term.

"It's shorthand for economic standing and education," Thomma said. "The term matches exit polling. By definition downscale whites make between $15 and $30,000 and didn't complete high school."

Oh right. "Downscale" has eight letters, "White Trash" would have had ten. It's all about abbreviation.
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 09:15 am
Thomas wrote:
JPB wrote:
sorry... continuing with my rant on population sectors.

How dare you! In a thread about polls of all things!

Quote:
Thomma said downscale whites is not a pejorative term.

"It's shorthand for economic standing and education," Thomma said. "The term matches exit polling. By definition downscale whites make between $15 and $30,000 and didn't complete high school."

Oh right. "Downscale" has eight letters, "White Trash" would have had ten. It's all about abbreviation.


We used to just call them "Po Folks". That's only 7 letters. Razz
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 11:12 am
Jeepers. I've just read the last few pages here and I've become confused as to who I might be supporting and why or why not. My dear mother is passed to the other side and I am alone. Perhaps I shall take a cue from all these brave campaigners and forge a new identity this very morning.


sozobe wrote:
Thomas wrote:
sozobe wrote:
And really I don't think anyone here is "in love with Obama like a gushing teenager." Roxxxanne tends to broad and enthusiastic endorsements of those she supports and denunciations of those she doesn't support. But I wouldn't call snood or anyone else here a gushing teenager.

I, too, tend to broad and enthusiastic statements of my thoughts. Maybe "gushing teenagers" and "no amount of facts" was too broad and too enthusiastic. But yes, I think that neither you, not snood, nor "anyone else", is overly receptive to inconvenient facts about Obama anymore. (I also expect that you and I would pretty much agree on the list of those who fall under "anybody else".)


OK, well that's how I took it, and why I referred to my post where my points a) and b) are acceptance of inconvenient facts. I have mixed feelings -- blatham, who you put on the "getting it" side of things, has said that he would throw yucky things at Obama if he rejects public financing. But yes, I took it as an agreement at the time, and I am disappointed in that aspect.


I have mixed feeling on this too. One could list the ways in which money corrupts the electoral process and governance and the count would easily surpass my twenty-one god-given digits.

But this election is too important. And the rules of the game - the real rules of this game, not the mythical rules - state absolutely clearly that if you are out of power then you will be dominated by others and you will be powerless.

I am, these days, reaching to be balanced and centrist. Thus in my new role as half angel/half devil, and imagining myself perched upon Obama's broad shoulder, I'd advise him to grab every bloody penny he can get from anywhere legal and ethical, then set a team to spin the PR problem that arises, and then, when he attains office to do everything he can to legislate serious electoral finance reform.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 01:33 pm
I think that's close to my take but I'm not sure yet. Still percolating.

Thomas wrote:
Does it affect your general perception of the hope, change, and integrity vision thing?


Hard to answer. Partly because Obama's appeal for me has been in large part his pragmatism. I read an article about Obama at some point that had a line that was something like, "It was a call to reasonableness, but he made it sound thrilling."

I like that reasonableness, though I also like that he's able to make it sound thrilling -- that he's able to get people involved the way he does. And of course reasonableness is thrilling after seven years of blatant unreasonableness, in and of itself.

So -- is it reasonable to refuse public financing at this point? It might be the most reasonable course. I wish that there had been if-then formulations at the beginning, rather than the outright "yes" that Fishin quotes.

Ultimately I think I hope that he goes ahead and bites the bullet and goes with public financing. $85 million is a lot. He'd get credibility that McCain is straining with his current FEC woes.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 01:35 pm
Another local bulletin:

I had a bunch of stuff to do today and have been driving around more than usual. I'm astounded at the volume of Obama signs. I was thinking that it had to be organizational, had to be something about Hillary HQ just not having signs available or something, when I finally saw my first Hillary sign. That's something like a 75-1 ratio at this point. Really surprised me.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 01:50 pm
An argument similar to mine above, but drawing out the future aspect in more detail. Inherent in her argument is an understanding of how the modern conservative movement managed to do what it has done over the last 40 years...

Quote:
Quote:


Schneiderman goes on to detail how the conservative movement successfully transformed the political playing field over a very long period, overturning assumptions and working the long view through a concerted, systematic effort to educate and persuade the public that the Republican Party stood for their values and their interests. They worked relentlessly not just to elect Republicans or enact certain policies, but to change the terms on which our national political debate was held.
http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/transformation-project
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 01:55 pm
Finally, a point on which Blatham and I can agree. I never liked bipartisanship. (And I don't mean that in Dys's sense of the phrase.)
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 04:22 pm
Thomas wrote:
JPB wrote:
sorry... continuing with my rant on population sectors.

How dare you! In a thread about polls of all things!

Quote:
Thomma said downscale whites is not a pejorative term.

"It's shorthand for economic standing and education," Thomma said. "The term matches exit polling. By definition downscale whites make between $15 and $30,000 and didn't complete high school."

Oh right. "Downscale" has eight letters, "White Trash" would have had ten. It's all about abbreviation.


Well, the thing is - like, I know I've used "downscale" once or twice lately - probably picked it up from the media talk. But how do you call lower-educated / lower-income voters? I'd call them "working class", but that doesnt seem to fly very well in America... :wink:
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Sat 1 Mar, 2008 05:45 pm
I guess up-scale people don't work?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 11/12/2024 at 07:52:10