David Kirkpatrick

February 26, 2009

Dems are stupid, too

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 5:59 pm

Learning nothing from the recent plight of the GOP and its circular-firing squad method of enforcing purity within the ranks, the left-wing has loosed this bit of stupidity. Defeat from the jaws of victory is there for the taking.

Maybe the GOP isn’t totally sunk just yet …

From the link:

Congressional Democrats who vote out of line with their more liberal constituencies will face some tough times in the next election cycle.

With the goal of using “primaries to hold incumbents to account for voting with corporate interests instead of their constituents,” a group of grassroots activist organizations, including Daily Kos, have come together to form the Accountability Now PAC.

Accountability Now has a “single guiding principle,” said co-founder Glenn Greenwald, “of challenging the institutional power structures that make it so easy, so consequence-free for Congress to open up the government coffers for looting by corporate America while people across the country are losing their jobs and their basic constitutional rights while unable to afford basic health care.”

December 11, 2008

Markos looks at some Palin popularity numbers …

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 6:16 pm

… and finds a lot to like.

First the stats:

The most popular Republican we tested is Condi Rice, whose fav/unfav 47%-18%. But among Republicans only, the most popular is Palin — with a whopping 73%-13% rating. But Palin’s overall score is a net negative, 35%-45%, which means she fares poorly among Democrats and independents.

And now the reaction from the Daily Kos founder:

  1. Those Palin numbers are as hilarious as she is. Republicans worship her, the rest of us (including our independent friends) think she is an embarrassment to humanity. It’s a win-win! They’re happy with Palin, and we’re happy that she continues to repulse independents, thus making them unelectable.
  1. Those Palin numbers illustrate, better than anything else, just how far rank-and-file Republicans have strayed from mainstream America. They’ve literally relegated themselves to fringe status

November 13, 2008

Looks like Ted Stevens will lose

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 1:01 pm

Alaska Senator Ted Stevens, the convicted seven-time felon for corruption who announced on his arrival in Alaska after the recent trial he “wasn’t convicted of anything,” will likely lose his seat to Democrat Mark Begich.

Counting votes is taking a while up north, but what was originally considered some voting irregularities seems to be sorting out as all the ballots are counted. This result will throw a new monkey wrench in some of that governor up there, what’s her name? I can’t remember also.

Although Alaskan law was changed to prevent governors from appointing themselves to open Senate seats (in case the Senate kicked the felon out once in session) Palin (oh yeah, that’s it you betcha) could step down and her successor could appoint her to the seat, or she could appoint a placeholder who promised not to run for reelection and then take a shot at the open seat when available.

From the link:

The Alaska Board of Elections has finally updated (pdf).With 17,728 votes counted since the previous update, Democrat Mark Begich has the lead over Republican Ted Stevens, 132,196 to 131,382.

More votes to be counted tomorrow and possibly Friday.

As we’ve pointed out and has been pointed out elsewhere,the remaining votes come from Begich-friendly districts. Mark Begich is now an overwhelming favorite to win the Alaska Senate seat.

Update 11/18 — The Associated Press called the race for Begich today.

From the Daily Kos link:

Looks like Mark Begich will be setting up a new office in DC after all…..MSNBC is reporting the race in Alaska has been called for Mark Begich.

WASHINGTON – Convicted Sen. Ted Stevens lost his re-election bid to Democrat Mark Begich after the last large batch of votes was counted Tuesday.

The longest-serving Republican in the history of the Senate trailed Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich by 3,724 votes after Tuesday’s count.

That’s an insurmountable lead with only about 2,500 overseas ballots left to be counted.

Per Lawrence O’Donnell and Dan Abrams on MSNBC, the vote difference is great enough Stevens would have to pay for a recount if he wanted one. And with a 3,724 vote lead, a recount is unlikely.

October 31, 2008

Whoa — Gallup polling four days out

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 2:50 pm
Sorry Gallup, this link goes to the Daily Kos. Mostly because it’s value-added if you hit the comments after checking out the extra content.

September 30, 2008

Another bad week for McCain

Filed under: Business, Politics — Tags: , , , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 1:25 pm

His numbers are real bad, and I’m sure the internals are even worse. To compound the issue there’s not a wad of hot gum or a steaming pile that he doesn’t step in these days. I’ve heard Trig is now going to debate in place of his mother.

From the Daily Kos link:

McCain Claims Credit For Bailout Before It Failed

Mon Sep 29, 2008 at 03:26:09 PM PDT

How mavericky of John McCain to take credit for the passage of the bailout bill…before it failed:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and his top aides took credit for building a winning bailout coalition – hours before the vote failed and stocks tanked.

The rush to claim he had engineered a victory now looks like a strategic blunder that will prolong the McCain’s campaign’s difficulty in finding a winning message on the economy.

September 13, 2008

I’ve read a few prescient …

Filed under: Media, Politics — Tags: , , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 1:15 am

… posts on this subject around the blogosphere (with a nice summation here from a Daily Dish reader).

The subject? McCain has completely seized the narrative of the election right now with the full complicity of the leftist blogs.

I just checked out the Daily Kos to see how that played out and found the first headline, “McCain Distorts and Twists on Taxes, Says Obama.”

Number one leads with McCain’s name. The next three are the usual “diary rescue,” etc. along with a hurricane update.

Number five is titled, “Oh Yeah. He’s A Maverick, All Right.” All McCain, no Obama.

Not long ago everyone — including me — was commenting on how all the left blogs were focused on Obama and all the right blogs were, too. Right now the calculus has completely flipped. McCain owns the electronic media cycle.

Things are getting very interesting. And the left may well be paving a road to their own personal hell. And no Nader to blame this time around.

Personally I’d love to see Obama in office, if nothing else to help break up the farce that is today’s GOP, but if I were the Democratic candidate I’m sure I would be at the point of thinking, “With friends like these …”

August 28, 2008

Obama’s speech

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 11:13 pm

I dug around to try and find some very partisan reactions (Update: both positive and negative, Dem and GOP) to the nomination acceptance speech from Obama, but there wasn’t much up yet aside from quickie bits.

I didn’t catch the entire speech, but I though it was strong and pointed. The word that came to my mind was “strident.” The tone almost bordered on angry at times and may well reflect a serious “in-it-to-win-it” attitude from the campaign going forward.

If you didn’t watch, or just want to relive the words, here’s a link to the text of the speech from the Daily Kos— and a link on that page will take you to the 650+ and counting comments from Kossacks across the land.

McCain is going to have a very tough road to hoe against a clearly energized and confident Obama over the next two and half months.

July 3, 2008

Not the best week for the left blogosphere

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 3:28 pm

And the New Republic calls them on it.

From the link:

And it’s hardly just the conservatives on the Journal editorial page noticing these moves. Witness the ever-excitable Glenn Greenwald throwing hissy-fits. Markos Moulitsas announces that he’s holding off on giving money. Arianna Huffington huffs ‘n puffs. By rejecting these people and their radicalism, Barack Obama isn’t just showing that he wants to win, but that he wants to govern the country responsibly.

Not sure which of these three tiny rants is the most embarrassing, but Markos came off as particularly whiny. I don’t think the far left understands that any candidate who meets all their criteria would be basically unelectable. And after the Bush 43 years, the same goes for the far right. My guess is the electorate is going to be very wary of any candidates with extreme ideas on either fringe.

April 24, 2008

Markos adds his two cents …

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 2:12 am

… on the state of the current Democratic situation. Along with a lot of poll information.

The summation?

So remind me again how is Clinton “more electable” against McCain than Obama?

She’s lost more contests to Obama than she’s won. She’s raised less money than he has. She fares poorer in the polling against McCain than he does. She trails in the popular vote.

And somehow, despite the fact she runs behind Obama in the general, the supers are supposed to overturn the will of the primary electorate and spur intra-party civil war on her behalf? Is she really that narcissistic?

Apparently so.

March 31, 2008

Clinton’s Bosnian flap goes on

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 3:10 pm

Clinton’s “misstatement” about coming under sniper fire in Bosnia was a pretty stupid statement. She’s been rightly pilloried by the YouTube parodies and the MSM, but now it’s just a pile on. Even the little girl who she protected from sniper fire read poetry to her is in on the act

From the Daily Kos link:

First it was the 3am little girl, now grown, speaking out for Barack Obama.  Now it’s the little girl in the Bosnia video!

“It is an ugly thing for a politician to tell lies,’ she said. “We had problems for years, and I don’t like when someone lies about them. It makes us look bad.”

Story at the NY Post.

March 18, 2008

More reactions to Obama’s race speech

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 2:58 pm

You can find my part one here and part three here.

Here’s some more reactions around the right and left parts of the blogosphere.

From the Corner:

Have I missed the competition?    [Charles Murray]

I read the various posts here on “The Corner,” mostly pretty ho-hum or critical about Obama’s speech. Then I figured I’d better read the text (I tried to find a video of it, but couldn’t). I’ve just finished. Has any other major American politician ever made a speech on race that comes even close to this one? As far as I’m concerned, it is just plain flat out brilliant—rhetorically, but also in capturing a lot of nuance about race in America. It is so far above the standard we’re used to from our pols…. But you know me. Starry-eyed Obama groupie.

Also from the Corner:

My Two Cents and Bottom Lines   [Cliff May]

Barack Obama gives a good speech — better than most of his congressional colleagues. But at this stage in his life and career, he’s not yet who he wishes to seem.

Obama’s supporters will now say: “Enough. Let’s move on.”

Hillary supporters will say: “We agree. Enough. Let’s move on.” But they will whisper: “You don’t think those evil Republicans will use this against him in the fall? He’s damaged goods.”

Independents will be split — they always are, that’s their job. But fewer will see him as they did: a different breed of politician, one who transcends race and party, an agent of beneficient and desirable “change.”

Conservatives are less likely to think an Obama presidency would be not so bad, and more likely to  see McCain as the lesser evil.

And one more from the Corner:

So, I just watched Barack Obama’s big race speech on YouTube. I haven’t yet read or heard any reaction or analysis. So, please forgive me if I repeat what has already been said.

My first reaction? Race speeches are rarely good, and this was no exception. For all of Obama’s new talk of change, courage, politics you can believe in, I heard a whole lot of liberal boilerplate dressed up in euphemism and offering no fresh solutions.

From Little Green Footballs:

Obama Attempts Double Back Flip

Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 9:05:24 am PST

Drudge Reporthas the transcript of Barack Obama’s speech, and it was just as weak as you thought it would be. Amazingly, Obama is sticking with the “cherry-picking” defense.

I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

From Obsidian Wings:

That’s Why I Say Hey Man Nice Speech

by publiusFirst impression – good speech. I wasn’t entirely convinced it was a good idea to do it, but I think it will play well – and certainly better than Romney’s. What I liked about it in particular was not so much the arguments themselves (which were good), but the unwillingness to fold in the face of media pressure.To back up, I think the relentless multiple-news cycle coverage of Wright has been absurd – and rooted in old stereotypes of the black community as a hotbed of angry nationalists. My fear was that Obama, in opting to give the speech, was giving into the trumped up and bogus frenzy. While I knew this specific controversy would pass, my more general fear was that Obama the candidate and president would be pressured to twist in the Beltway winds.

Here’s a link to a slew of reviews at Daily Kos.

March 12, 2008

The latest Democratic nomination math

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 3:13 pm

This is a solid breakdown from the Daily Kos.

From the link:

But if we’re suddenly going to use the popular vote as a meaningful measure in this campaign, then we should strive to actually count that popular vote best we can. So what I’ll do for caucus states is divide the state delegate percentages (as opposed to pledged delegates) by the total turnout. It’s an inexact science, but it should keep things within an acceptable margin of error.

So for all the other contests:

Obama: 13,025,003
Clinton: 12,421,316

That’s a 603,687-vote advantage for Obama. Now for NV, WA and ME:

     Turnout  Obama %  Clinton %  Popular vote advantageIA:   220,588   38       30        Obama  +17,646
NV:   117,599   45       51        Clinton +7,055
WA:   250,000   68       32        Obama  +90,000
ME:    45,000   59       40        Obama   +8,550

That’s about 56,500109,141 votes, putting Obama’s lead at around 713,000 votes.

That still leaves the Texas caucuses, which haven’t finished reporting out. Turnout for the first 40 percent of precincts reporting is about 500,000. Now that includes some of the more populous precincts, so we can’t just project out. Rather, the estimate I hear bandied around is about 1 million participants. So let’s say the numbers ended up were stuck today — 56-44 Obama — that would mean a gain for Obama of 120,000 in the popular vote.

Suddenly, Obama’s lead is about 780,000 833,000.

Unless Obama suffers an epic collapse, he should end this contest with a lead in the popular vote, a lead in the pledged delegates, and a lead in the number of states won.

Clinton will apparently attempt her coup by super delegates, but that path lies civil war. I doubt the supers are that stupid.

I followed this Daily Kos link from the Daily Dish, and agree with Sullivan. He writes, “Do the Clintons seriously intend to overturn that?” I’m going to guess, yes. Team Clinton honestly thinks she deserves the nomination, even while losing the popular vote, pledged delegates and total states won. It’s becoming almost impossible for Clinton to pass Obama in any of those three areas.

Her campaign has been certifiably full of incompetence, misdirection, obfuscation and even a few outright lies. Hopefully Obama won’t be brought low by these tactics. So far he’s doing more than keeping above the water line.

February 14, 2008

Democrat labor endorsements

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 10:56 pm

Interesting breakdown from Daily Kos on how labor endorsements will affect/are affecting the Democratic primaries.

Particularly how today’s UFCW and the expected SEIU endorsements will help Obama on the ground.

January 19, 2008

Clinton shenanigans in Nevada?

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 6:32 pm

First hand account from the Daily Kos here.

Hardball tactics can win elections. They can also come back to bite you in the ass.

(Hat tip: the Daily Dish)

January 12, 2008

The Kos Michigan strategy

Filed under: Politics — Tags: , , — David Kirkpatrick @ 2:40 pm

Markos over at the Daily Kos is proposing some Michigan mischief. The idea is the Michigan primary is meaningless for Democrats because for the moment the state’s delegates have been stripped for violation of party rules.

Kos suggests Democrats should vote in the GOP primary for Mitt Romney. He reckons a Mitt (and his enormous bankroll) win will keep the GOP race much tighter with the candidates spending money and fiercely battling amongst themselves rather than preparing for the eventual Democratic presidential nominee.

There is a storied history of just this sort of behavior in Michigan. Among other incidents, the GOP crossed over to vote in 1988 giving that primary to Jesse Jackson.