snood wrote:I don't think he meant anything...
Whaaaaaa? She meant she wonders if Blatham wants to watch you tapdance, that's all. Jeez - can't y'all read either?
You're instigatin' - and when the bricks start flyin', its all gonna be your fault... bad ole SC.
Um, with all due respect, joking around about the stereotypes that people apply to OTHER people can make for incendiary fun. I tend to steer clear of it, having been the recipient myself now and then...
D'artagnan wrote:Um, with all due respect, joking around about the stereotypes that people apply to OTHER people can make for incendiary fun. I tend to steer clear of it, having been the recipient myself now and then...
D'art, you are correct, sir! Why, just the other day several people PM'd me about a certain Bush thread which somehow morphed itself into a sorta Kill the Jews thread, so I been there-had that-had enough...I be good now
:wink: !
whew! ...thought I was gonna have to open up my hermetically-sealed,
stored under funk-and-wagnalls-front-porch, 50 year old, rusty, dusty, 500 gallon barrel of
WHUPASS!
good thing for alla youse......
Since this thread is about Democratic contenders and I've been mostly absent from news gathering for about 48 hours, I wonder whether what I sense is true, that the remarkable and successful effort of many small donors to give Dean's campaign a financial boost (which came to a head Monday evening, the cut-off date for FEC financial reports) has not been given a whole lot of positive recognition?
It's troubling to me that we have nationwide dismay about our low vote turnout and spotty participation in political processes but now that there is thoughtful protest from activists and an awakening of interest and participation in the process, this positive change is largely brushed aside.. Or did I miss something?
Tartarin--it seems to me I've seen or heard some positive mentions of Dean's fund-raising success. But then my sources--usually the NY Times and NPR--might be considered suspect by some. Dean is now on Gary Trudeau's radar, for those who follow "Doonesbury".
http://www.uclick.com/client/sea/db/
I've seen quite a bit of coverage of it - I may be looking a little harder than the average bear (no offense to BPB) because I like Dean, but it seems like his raising 7 and some odd million dollars in such a short span of time got a lot of mention (even on FAUX - begrudging, and sneering, but coverage).
It is encouraging. It is interesting to me how the media searched him out at first and built him up as this "straight talkin' guy", and now that they've seen him gain popularity, the tendency semms to be to find dirt, or at least blemish. It's a strange thing about the media...
Ya know, Snood, when he was unknown outside his state and/or region, and his name was bandied about as a candidate, the novelty vultures of the press descend--then it's "Hey, i like this guy!"
When he is known, just saying: "Hey, i still like this guy!" ain't news no more . . . but finding feet of clay could be--let's dig, i'm sure we can find something of an unpleasant nature . . .
The product is novelty, and now, novelty would likely be defined in terms of "dark secrets" . . .
Don'tcha just love the press? Don'tcha just wanna take 'em all home an' cuddle 'em?
That's what the media do: Build 'em up, then knock 'em down. At least, that's what they try to do...
What seduces me is the spread of that money. The average contribution to his $7M campaign was about $100. Compare that, in terms of prospective votes, to raising $70M in $2000+ increments. Wowwhatalotofmoney BUT how many votes? Or (again) am I missing something?
Tartarin wrote:What seduces me is the spread of that money. The average contribution to his $7M campaign was about $100. Compare that, in terms of prospective votes, to raising $70M in $2000+ increments. Wowwhatalotofmoney BUT how many votes? Or (again) am I missing something?
Just for comparison (please draw your own conclusions) I found this data on Bush's 2000 fundraising:
Quote:5/20/00
Bush's May 1 FEC report shows he raised at total of $84 million, with $3,831,029 raised in April, spent $4,711,967 in April, and has cash on hand of $5,964,653.
Bush has spent a total of $78,094,033
Bush's average contribution is $258. http://www.politicsandelections.com/usa/2000/contributions/bush.htm
I highly doubt that any candidate's average is anywhere near the $2,000 limit.
quick off topic clarifier post...I could do this by pm but it's a public matter so I'll do it here....
re my last post to snood...I just want it absolutely clearly understood by everybody here that snood is one of my very favourite people on this board...he's quick, smart, and IS a very funny fellow indeed. The familiarity I used earlier was used on the basis of the friendship he and I have built and shared here, and it followed on a set of snood's posts which had me falling off my chair. So, no one ought to be messing up my friendship with this fellow. I value it.
I'm sorry you had to post that, Blatham, and I bet Snood is too. You are two of my absolutely favorite people here for personality, intelligence AND WIT! -- and I had a moment of terror back there that civility and affection were being threatened. Abuzz had a lot of problems with spammers and rightwing nuts, but my worst problem (and the one which finally drove me away) was with the destructive, authoritarian radicals within my own political group. Please, everyone, don't let's allow three key freedoms -- expressiveness, humor and wit -- fall victim to this in A2K as well!
What a buncha goofballs . . .
Tartarin...go for him low...snood, get him high...and I'll flirt with Beth
