Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Tue 24 Apr, 2007 06:05 am
Today, the second part of that "investigation" is publlished: now focused on what it actually was aimed at, namely Rezko.
0 Replies
 
Vietnamnurse
 
  1  
Tue 24 Apr, 2007 01:48 pm
Nothing about it in the WaPo or the NYTimes though, Walter. Makes you wonder.

I had a Republican friend from Chicago visit this weekend...said he was impressed with Obama.

Me too, I must say, and I am getting more so as I read more about him. I like to read everything...even the more critical points.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Tue 24 Apr, 2007 02:45 pm
Well, the Sun-Times wasn't a friend of Obama from the earliest times onwards.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Tue 24 Apr, 2007 03:40 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
I'd wager they're not soros-funded...

Laughing
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 24 Apr, 2007 11:19 pm
I'm just wondering what kind of garbage Rove is planning to create on Obama just before the elections - like they did to destroy Kerry and McCain? I can already smell the stench, but can't tell what shite it is.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Wed 25 Apr, 2007 04:25 pm
Debates!

I'm so excited! This is the good stuff.

There will be one tomorrow at 7 PM EST on MSNBC (it better be captioned or I'm going to be way pissed). It will be the "Democratic candidates" -- I assume it will be the big three but not sure how many others.

Whee!
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Wed 25 Apr, 2007 04:32 pm
OK, confirmed that it's the first, and that there will be 8 people. Big 3 plus Richardson, Dodd, Biden, Kucinich and Mike Gravel.

More here (Reuters).
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 05:08 pm
So has there been something about the debates? I've been busy the last couple of days, and just searched but didn't find anything (except cjhsa's chartered plane bit). Apologies if I missed it.

I watched the full first hour, then Survivor came on *coff* and I went back to it during commercials. Was out today and saw some highlights on CNN that I hadn't seen live, like Obama responding to Gravel's baiting about who he was going to nuke -- heh!

Dick Morris is saying Obama won:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268978,00.html

I dunno.

It was disappointing to me on a few levels. Except for Gravel, so damn scripted. I didn't like how Obama danced around a few of 'em. I noticed other people dancing too, I know, that's what they do, they practice and then if the question is at all about what they practiced they do what they practiced. Even if it doesn't quite answer the question. Still annoyed me.

Obama looked nervous, too, especially at the beginning. His eyes were a little squinty, his body language was a bit tense.

In terms of who did BETTER, though, eh. Edwards was a big disappointment. I did NOT like his answers to the $400 haircut questions. (Goes to notes.) (Yes I took notes.) (Even though I cut away for Survivor I'm nerdy enough that I took notes.)

Quote:
Well, that was a mistake, which we've remedied. It was simply a mistake. But if the question is, Brian, whether I live a privileged and blessed lifestyle now, the answer to that's yes.

A lot of us do. But it's not where I come from. And I've not forgotten where I come from.


(My notes didn't make sense -- "blessed" and "a lot of us do," but I couldn't remember what came before that -- went to the transcript for the whole thing.)

That just annoyed me. A LOT of us do not have that kind of privileged and blessed lifestyle. "Some of us do" maybe. And that segue seemed just way too blatant and slick. Yeah yeah yeah you had a poor upbringing we know. Something about how he handled it seemed wrong, and I'm sympathetic to him.

Another note, heavily underlined: "Hillary: SHIFTY-EYED." She's really bad about that, especially when she's uncomfortable. I made that note when she was talking about her vote for the Iraq war, and she was looking down + side-to-side, looked terrible.

Biden did pretty well, he had some good lines, ("yes," heh!), had a certain anti-bullshit attitude that was impressive.

Obama had some nice ones too -- I liked "my wife may have a longer list" in replying to mistakes he's made, and his spirited comeback to Gravel (would have liked to have seen some more of that spirit in the rest of the debate -- maybe he warmed up over the course of it and I missed the best stuff by missing so much of the last half hour).

Noted that Hillary didn't take the chance to say something about her vote on Iraq in that section ("mistakes in the last 4 years") -- instead she went way back to 1993 and the health care thing, hmph.

Oh, and one thing that I haven't noticed much of, don't know if this is the only time he's done it though -- Obama seems to usually shy away from using terms like "will" when it comes to the presidency -- more "if I become president," or "an Obama presidency would..." But at some point he was talking about something that would be done as president and said "something that I intend to do." One of the first times I saw him talking like he thinks he WILL actually be president.

That seems to be the end of my notes.

What did you guys think?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 07:43 pm
Didnt see it, just read about it..

sozobe wrote:
I did NOT like his answers to the $400 haircut questions. (Goes to notes.) (Yes I took notes.) (Even though I cut away for Survivor I'm nerdy enough that I took notes.)

Quote:
Well, that was a mistake, which we've remedied. It was simply a mistake. But if the question is, Brian, whether I live a privileged and blessed lifestyle now, the answer to that's yes.

A lot of us do. But it's not where I come from. And I've not forgotten where I come from.

Yeah, that sounds pretty lame.

Pity, because the other day he'd tried out a line that sounded much better:

Quote:
SHAVE AND A HAIRCUT. . . .:

John Edwards finally responds to the $400-haircut allegations swirling around him. A sampling from the Quad-City Times:

    Edwards joked about the haircut fallout during his talk to 150 voters. He said his personal story is an example of why people want to come to America. "They want to come here because people like me ... the son of a mill worker ... can now be running for president and paying $400 for a haircut," Edwards said to loud laughter.
That's a good line.

--Jason Zengerle
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 07:50 pm
sozobe wrote:
Dick Morris is saying Obama won:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,268978,00.html

I dunno.

Here's some takes from TNR's The Plank:

Quote:
MIKE GRAVEL:

Delightfully blunt--or barking mad? You make the call...


Quote:
QUICK THOUGHTS:

Joe Biden is much, much better when his answers are all limited to sixty seconds.

On the other side of the ledger, Bill Richardson comes across as much, much less impressive than he does in television interviews.

--Isaac Chotiner


Quote:
"WE HAVE NO IMPORTANT ENEMIES!":

Mike Gravel, doing his earnest best to destroy the Democratic party's image. Can't someone intervene to get him out of future debates?

--Michael Crowley


Quote:
BIDEN:

Isaac, you're right that he's very good under time limits. Is there some way to outfit him with, say, a high-tech ankle bracelet that issues a mild electric shock when he speaks for more than 30 uninterrupted seconds? It'd make him an instant frontrunner!

--Michael Crowley


Quote:
HILLARY:

Smooth and steady--she's disciplined and it shows. Obama was a tad shaky, I thought. Substantively, did we learn anything significant tonight? I'm not sure we did.

--Michael Crowley

FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH:

I think Mike is right about both Obama and Hillary. That's two people. It's a trend!

--Isaac Chotiner


Quote:
GIVE FORCE A CHANCE:

One of the debate's few memorable moments was Biden's brief but impasssioned spiel in defense of the use of force--specifically, in Afghanistan, the Balkans, and (if he gets his way) Darfur. Biden might have had the night's best performance, at least relative to expectations.

--Michael Crowley


Quote:
A STAR IS BORN:

With 3725 votes cast in a DailyKos poll asking who won tonight's debate, Mike Gravel is ahead of Joe Biden, Chris Dodd, Bill Richardson, and (of course) Hillary Clinton.

Update: At about 6000 votes Edwards is the clear winner, a shade ahead of Obama. (And Hillary has edged ahead of Gravel...)

--Michael Crowley


Quote:
WHO WON LAST NIGHT'S DEBATE?:

I don't think I saw the same debate that the Daily Kos poll readers did. They think that John Edwards won the debate, followed by Barack Obama. I have nothing against John Edwards--in fact, I have often argued that, on paper, he is best Democratic candidate for president, although not the best prepared to be president--but I thought that if there was one loser among the top tier candidates, it was Edwards. His responses appeared canned and phony. I wondered when listening to him whether worries over his wife's illness were affecting him. His answer about how he could reconcile his populism with his role as a consultant to a hedge fund was classic doublespeak [..].

What, then, to make of the Daily Kos reader poll showing that Edwards "won" the debate? I can only think of two explanations. The first is the psychological propensity of people to see the best in their favorites. Edwards's standing in the debate poll tracks pretty well with his leading the Daily Kos reader poll about presidential choice, where on April 16 he was the choice of 42 percent compared to 25 percent for Obama. Hillary Clinton trailed with 3 percent! The second possibility is that the Edwards people--perhaps without any specific direction from the campaign--were stuffing the ballot box the way that candidates and their supporters sometimes do to affect straw polls. Let's go with the first, especially given the grudging recognition by 12 percent (compared to 19 percent for Edwards) that Hillary Clinton gave the best performance.

In my own view, Hillary Clinton gave the best performance of the candidates. She was self-assured, clear. Obama got better after the first hour, but appeared ill at ease in his first responses. Chris Dodd won't get the nomination, but he showed that experience does count in answering political questions. It's never clear to me, though, what really matters in these debates. Sometimes it is a single line that sums up a candidate's appeal--Ronald Reagan was a master of these--or that destroys their candidacy. But I don't think there was an instance of either in this first debate.

--John B. Judis
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:00 pm
Interesting, thanks!

(A fellow wonk! Finally! Doesn't anyone else enjoy watching and/or reading about and analyzing the debates?!)

I agree with the final one, about Edwards. He was plain NOT impressive, and I always expect him to be good with this stuff (his VP debates weren't impressive, either).

I wonder if his natural tendency is to go into high drama lawyer mode and he's been forced to take that down several notches but he's never really hit his comfort level. He always seems more boring than he should be during debates.

Funny about Biden + time limits. :-) He definitely was one of the more impressive ones.

This isn't the last debate, I'm hoping Obama will get better with each one. It's promising if he got better during the course of this single debate, hope he won't always start shakily.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:03 pm
Meanwhile, Pollster.com has this - interesting:

(Note - click the headline to see the original item, which has links that I have not reproduced here)

Quote:
Tag clouds for the Democratic debate

Janet Harris, a friend and Pollster reader, sends an interesting bit of analysis she did on last night's MSNBC Democratic debate. Using the free site TagCrowd, she created a set of "tag clouds" that provides a visual depiction of the words used most often last night by each of the candidates.

For those not familiar with the term, you have probably seen tag clouds appearing on many web sites (and hopefully, very soon here on Pollster). They were apparently first implemented on the photo sharing site Flickr, and typically provide a visual representation of the most popular "tags" assigned to web pages. The type size of each word varies according to its frequency of usage. The larger the type size, the more often each candidate used that word.

Here are the clouds Janet created:

http://www.pollster.com/BidenTag400.png

http://www.pollster.com/ClintonTag400.png

http://www.pollster.com/DoddTag400.png

http://www.pollster.com/EdwardsTag400.png

http://www.pollster.com/GravelTag400.png

http://www.pollster.com/KucinichTag400.png

http://www.pollster.com/ObamaTag400.png

http://www.pollster.com/RichardsonTag400.png

[..] Now of course, this is a quick blog post, which probably raises as many questions for me as it answers. Each of the clouds consists of the 50 words used most often, omitting common words like "and," "of," "the," etc. I am not sure if the scale of the words is comparable across clouds -I suspect that Professor Franklin will feel strongly that they should be. Finally, for what it's worth, Janet also sends along this total word count for each candidate:

* 1,872 - Senator Obama
* 1,766 - Senator Clinton
* 1,518 - Senator Edwards
* 1,281 - Governor Richardson
* 1,180 - Representative Kucinich
* 961 - Senator Biden
* 912 - Senator Dodd
* 753 - Senator Gravel

A few quick observations, with an assist from Janet (who is the president of the media analysis firm, Upstream Analysis):

* Notice the more frequent use of wonkier language by Chris Dodd, particularly the use of "administration," "multinational," "stateless," etc.
* Now contrast that to John Edwards, whose answers tend to use everyday language and deliver a message loud and clear message: "America," "believe," "united."
* The one-issue emphasis of Kucinich and Gravel - "war" -- is obvious.

[..] Readers, what do you see in these clouds? Our comment section is wide open...

--Mark Blumenthal on April 27, 2007 in Mystery Pollster, The 2008 Race


This is most of what the readers added (youve got to be endeared by the earnest re-checking on why "hell" did not show up in Gravel's cloud :wink: ):

Quote:
Comments

A tag cloud for Joe Biden that doesn't include the words "facetious" or "solicitous"? I'm amazed.

Posted by: Elliott Larkfield | April 27, 2007 12:15 PM

---

I see that Obama's manner of thinking about things is utterly unlike any of his competitors, and that, as you point out, Biden, Clinton, & Dodd share a "wonky" way of approaching national issues.

Posted by: oddjob | April 27, 2007 12:15 PM

---

Obama's tag cloud is almost devoid of words with powerful emotional content. Contrast that with Hillary. Edwards isn't bad, either. This is a weakness for Obama. If his words were not powerful, how will people remember him, unless his personal presentation made up for the weak content.

One of the key aspects of right-wing framing is the use of emotionally loaded language, in particular words that code for powerful images.

It would be interesting to observe the tag-cloud for a random George Bush speech, or a random Tom Tancredo speech.

Posted by: Metadata | April 27, 2007 12:29 PM

---

Obama's tag cloud has many more process words than the others - adverbs vs. nouns. I think it is telling that among his biggest nouns are "families" and "women."

Also telling is the total word count = the amount of time to speak them. The more words, the more time to talk. It seems apparent that MSNBC gave time roughly equivalent to the candidates place in the polls with Obama and Clinton swapped.

Posted by: Keith Murphy | April 27, 2007 1:26 PM

---

"Constitution" only appears in one of the clouds.

Posted by: j | April 27, 2007 1:32 PM

---

"energy", "oil", "warming" do not appear at all. Very discouraging.

Posted by: Tim Blank | April 27, 2007 3:25 PM

---

why did you leave out the word "hell" from gravel's tag cloud? he said it maybe 8 times. answers?

Posted by: Paul | April 27, 2007 3:42 PM

---

> "energy", "oil", "warming" do not appear at all. Very discouraging.

Obama, Richardson have energy. Kucinich has oil. The tags are in alphabetical order, so even the smaller print words are somewhat decipherable.

Anyway, wouldn't it be dependent upon the questions they were asked?

Posted by: James | April 27, 2007 3:45 PM

---

How many times did Richardson use "unsees"?

Posted by: J2 | April 27, 2007 4:02 PM

---

I have trouble believing that word count. Seems off to me.

Also, gee, wonder what is on Hillary's mind? President is as big as a breadbasket. While it doesn't even show up for Dodd.

Posted by: Robert P. | April 27, 2007 4:22 PM

---

Paul: We checked, and the problem is that the word "hell" does not appear in the closed captioning of the debate text that Janet used to create the clouds.

Posted by: Mark Blumenthal | April 27, 2007 4:39 PM
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:04 pm
Hey Soz Smile

Well, if those tag clouds arent wonky enough.. Razz
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:07 pm
"Hell" appeared in the closed captions... what are they talking about? :-/
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:08 pm
Loved the tag clouds!

I wonder if they actually translate to anything, though?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:09 pm
Well they're pretty hard to translate into Hungarian..
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:10 pm
<runs>
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:11 pm
By the way I mentioned about Obama finally talking like he believes he can be president, Hillary did it all the damn time. Reminded by the big ol' "PRESIDENT" in her tag cloud. She probably was referring to Bush at least some of the time, but she jammed "when I'm president" in there a lot. It struck a false note with me.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:12 pm
<whap!>
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Fri 27 Apr, 2007 08:15 pm
Rolls eyes...
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 189
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.19 seconds on 08/07/2025 at 01:23:50