Posts by Angus Robertson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Russell,
The chilling thing is the possibility that the author, as a 21st century Republican, has, through the Bush White House, the US prosecutors scandal and any number of appointments and contracts in the Iraq project, simply become acclimatised to the idea of a culture of governance that values political loyalty over competence and integrity.
Yeah I am inclined to agree, but sooner or later some author is going to come out and say that the "the most honest, the most open, the most ethical Congress in US history" is any of those things, whilst in the real world its approval rating is 9%.
With some of the stuff I read about Palin, I prefer to think that the person is saying it out of a feeling of political loyalty. People have being crying "wolf!" about Palin.
Attacking Palin is a no win, several alleged facts have been challenged successfully - that built up a precedent that makes new facts seem more doubtful. And people like the woman, she has a public profile and appears to be a normal person. And she is the Veep.
-
Craig,
The irony is that Angus links to Commentary, a magazine that would be raising merry hell if Palin was a liberal feminist...
..."My party right or wrong" is the new standard.
The "new" standard, you are joking right?
-
Angus, you're trolling aren't you? (And that's an entirely rhetorical question, because trolls never cop to what they're doing.)
No, I can't take credit. It is a meme that has quickly taken root amoung the right-o-sphere reviews of the NYT piece. It is seen as her being willing to make changes, by y'know actually making changes.
-
By the way, if Karl Rove is such a fricking genius why don't the Republicans have majorities in the House and Senate any more?
Because the Democrats ran a campaign based on faillings in Iraq (an actual issue) and the dislike most Americans have for the Bush administration played against the Republicans. And because its nigh impossible to mount Rovian attacks and dog-whistles against hundreds of diverse candidates.
-
The NYT has managed to find out that an American politician has - wait for it, shock/horror - brought in her own team. OMG that is like crazy...
-
I don't think David Frum is going to be getting an invite to National Review's election night party if he keeps writing things like this:
He'll do fine.
David Frum hints that it is questionable to pick someone of limited experience, chosen on the up-swing of their political career. But he says he is referring to Sarah Palin, right. I mean this couldn't be an attempt to raise questions of experience and underdone career amoung potential Obama voters prior to the election could it?
-
I think this [Palin] is gonna be a core theme from hereon and it potentially has legs.
Yes, it does for Republicans.
McCain polls a 55 - 35% lead in terms of qualities. McCain is a senator of long standing and was a senator well before the current crop (including Obama) brought Congress' approval rate down to 14%. Palin is a governor with 80% approval ratings. You think with 6 weeks to go in a campaign you can turn all that around with a yahoo account, a losing mayor and a waitress as criticism of the Veep - WTF?
It says so much about McCain that could really hurt him if it gets traction.
If it takes 10% out of McCain's credibility it will be a massive achievement and McCain will lead by 50 - 40% on election day. If it raises credibility as the MSM reason du jour it will relegate the issues - economy, climate, Iraq - to minor importance. Credibility voters (mostly supporting McCain) will be motivated to vote and issue voters (mostly supporting Obama) will be less motivated.
McCain will win.
PS - After the election, somewhere well away from prying eyes, Karl Rove will raise a small toast to the netroots. Because it is the netroots who are doing massive spade work and tireless hours that are required to make credibility the central theme of 08.
PPS - McCain is 3% ahead on popular vote and projected to win the electoral college, so already we can see the "benefits" of a focus on Palin.
-
I can hear you point out that Jason Bourne's an entirely fictitious character. Still not seeing the downside.
Well there is that uncomfortably close relationship he has with Matt Damon, the stinking rich Prius driving Hollywood liberal.
-
Maybe you can point me in the direction of a campaign ad endorsed by Obama that twists the truth as dishonestly as the sex ed one yesterday? Or a show me a link where McCain defends Obama against his alleged lack of patriotism or Islamic ties? I can show you a few where Obama praises McCain's service record.
Simon,
Like I said above Obama is "sticking to the issues - economy, health, war and not indulging in personal politics". He is running a clean campaign, a campaign which I admire and think has the best chance of delivering the White House. He is running a smart campaign.
Unfortunately he is backed by an on-line community who consider no gutter too low and no smear too putrid. During the primary campaign he embraced this online support, they became his team and he became their man, it played a large part in how he managed to out perform Clinton. Last week and over the weekend the online left went into full bloviating mode over Palin, spewing out massive volumes of factoids (repeatable lies intended to have some appealing quality). They attacked the qualities of Palin - they did this because they are IMHO really stoopid.
With issues voters Obama has a 55 - 35% advantage, with qualities voters McCain has a 55 - 35% advantage. It is very simple - if the campaign can be framed in terms of qualities over issues McCain will win. If you want Obama to win STFU about whatever it is you think you know about what it is Palin did and when, because that is an issue of qualities.
But don't just take my word for it - Boston Globe has a real succinct column about it with nice graphs for the relevent stats.
-
Simon,
Absolutely...the Rovian philosophy centres around an overriding assumption the voter is neither discerning or smart.
That is a good description, I like it. The Rovian philosophy practiced by Salon, Huffington Post, Daily Kos is to low ball in rumours and innuendo to smear a candidate relying upon the voter being neither discerning or smart.
All that remains now is to see who plays Rovian politics the best - Karl Rove or the Dem pundits who decided this is where they needed to take the race.