Are the Polls Really This Close? Really?

If any Republican can overcome the wretched stain of eight years of George Bush and win the White House we deserve whatever bad things will happen to us.

Jack Cafferty

I realize that this is a best of the worst of McCain, but I can't imagine anyone putting together similar clips of Obama, that offered as frightening a glimpse of the man as future president. What makes this frightening is that most of these clips are from the last few months. He has made so many gaffes that he can have a 5 minute blooper reel based on three months of appearances. Actually saying gaffes seems generous, he places Iraq on the Pakistani border, thinks Czechoslovakia is still one country, Putin is the current president of Russia and Germany, and doesn't know which extremists Iran is supposed to be sending into Iraq. He either regularly misstates the facts or doesn't know what they are, and he constantly contradicts himself. What is most frightening is that McCain's distance from reality is no more discussed in the mainstream media than the fact that the Maverick is dead. Instead they talk about the effectiveness of his negative ads. Considering the problems the country is facing, the more relevant question to be asking is why would McCain's campaign sink millions into an ad featuring Paris Hilton, instead of promoting his positions and policies. At this point in the campaign I don't believe that McCain is even an improvement over Bush. I'm not sure if he holds any conviction that he wouldn't trade for votes. He has changed his position on every issue which once set him apart from his party, immigration, campaign finance, torture; going so far as to abandon his own bills. I can't imagine the damage he would do to the nation as President. Although I know it seems easy to say living in Spain, I agree with Jack.

h/t crooksandliars.com

Update: I'm not the only one who thinks would be no improvement over Bush.

Comments

The Intersectional Swiftboat Waltz

This past week the Working Families Parties endorsed Elizabeth Warren in the democratic primary. It's a somewhat obscure thing, in terms of national politics. WFP is a nominally left party started in New York state. In New York rather than run their own candidates they endorse Democrats. The choice of the centrist Warren over Sanders isn't without precedent. They endorsed Joe Crowley over Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, and Andrew Cuomo over Zephyr Teachout. The entire affair is only relevant for what it suggests that we can expect from the rest of the primary.

When the endorsement was announced, members asked leadership to release the breakdown of votes, as they did in 2015 when the party endorsed Sanders. Leadership refused, saying something about preserving the integrity of the vote. What was obvious, where the 56 person leadership/advisory board had a vote equal to that of the 10,000+ membership, is that the leaders had heavily favored Warren while the members went to Sanders. I…

If You Love Your People, Set It Free (or How an Identitarian Came To Prefer Universal Policy Over Identity Politics)

This post is late because I was in LA last week, where I made a point of walking as much as possible to enjoy my audiobook. Although I still have 20/20 vision I have been slow to accept that aging has made it more difficult to read, making it feel increasingly like a chore. In fully embracing this I've finally started looking for audiobooks I might find engaging enough to not be constantly distracted. For my trip I chose Mehrsa Baradaran's The Color of Money, which looks at the persistence of the racial wealth gap in the US. It was incredibly striking and depressing listening to The Color of Money while accidentally walking through encampments of the unhoused, watching new encampments sprout up in the short time that I was there. This is who we've always been. If you have any doubt, the history recounted in The Color of Money makes it clear that capitalism has always been about extracting wealth from Black people and keeping poor people poor. On checking into Twitter I wa…

Is Cynicism More Disqualifying Than Ignorance?

I was somewhat reluctant at the time to ascribe any specific intent to Elizabeth Warren's DNA stunt, just focusing on what it said about her political instincts. In retrospect, because of subsequent choices, I see it as craven cynicism. I get that, "I have a plan for that!" is supposed to be her new brand, but obviously, a working plan isn't a central part of that. Her brand should actually be "Pandering Cynic". I now find myself wondering if even she thinks the policy she offers will do what she says it's intended to do. I've been saying in my head that I feel irrational anger towards her, but it's actually quite rational and specific.

My posting schedule has been off because I've been playing with the idea of submitting pieces for publication. I've been thinking a lot about how we talk about disparities and how the conversation is used as a cudgel against universal policy. The closest to a good faith version of this argument is usually…

the bastards' last stand

Search This Blog