No, it's not ok that Hillary hired Mark Penn to slime Democrats in the primary. Penn is bad news for all Democrats, just like Karl Rove is bad for Republicans. It takes time, but negativity eventually blows back.
Getting up at 3:30 to work on your speech probably left you a little slow on your feet. It seems to me that you would have been better off working less and sleeping later. It's better to be quick on your feet than rewriting your speech another 2 times.
You may be too damn young to have enough good anecdotes to use the way you intend. If you don't have the material, don't try to force that speaking technique on it. Don't put the vehicle ahead of substance.
Edwards took poll points from Obama, it appears. Perhaps Edwards message worked in NH and Obama's didn't.
Iowa is a different story. Hillary tanked in Iowa and Edwards moved up.
It looks to me like Edwards was the only one of the top three to move up significantly after the debates, but he didn't do well in South Carolina. Maybe his message has become too progressive for South Carolina.
FH loves DLC members. (S)he probably doesn't want or believe in single-payer but just tries to use it as a wedge issue. I say bullshit. FH was banned by popular demand from DKos for this kind of dishonest garbage.
There was a tremendous leftist push in the Depression years which led to the New deal and the ascendancy of organized labor. That push had it's roots in the years before WWI. Over and over through history you see the advance of progress, then reaction to it.
The "60's was a multigenerational and multiracial period of social progress. "Hippies" were a small part of that period, but one that proved useful as a political wedge by reactionaries like Nixon and Reagan.
Matt has fallen victim to old Republican talking points. They weren't true then and they aren't true now.
It was much more formative than WWII for the parents of the "'60's" generation. The Depression was the result of the utterly complete failure of conservative ideas. It showed the necessity of government protections against unbounded market forces, corruption and greed.
Um, no, actually farms were not usually single-family. I guess you didn't come from a farming family, or you might have a better idea of the level of work involved. That's why the north was able to reject slavery before the south, because heavily industrialized area weren't dependant on the free labor that farming required.
Actually, some of the multi-family dwellings of the post-war era are still considered idyllic. For the most part, it was later on- with complexes like Pruitt-Igoe- that problems arose.
I'm not trying to make pro-con points, though. My point is only that anyone trying to evaluate the politics of the time should look at somthing substantive on the matter.
Books like "Bowling Alone", "The Rise of the Creativity Class" sell well because they start w. an easily understood thesis and apply it across an array of fields. They aspire to easy-to-grasp universal relevance, so they end up addressing virtually nothing w. any amount of depth. It's a Rush Limbaugh approach- grab an armful of stats, make sweeping conclusions,- and people will feel smart and informed and unchallenged.
It might sound totally off-topic, but I think as background you might want to look at a book like Gwendolyn Wright's "Building the War: A Social History of Housing." Single family housing was largely unheard of in this country until after WWII ( until then, the high end of the income spectrum had live-in servants. And the lower end cohabited w. multi-generations out of economic necessity.)
New mass-production building techniques and the FHA made single family housing a norm in an astonishingly short period of time. And a drastic and sudden a change in living environments is obviously going to have significant psycho-sociological reverberations. Modes of advertising and communication followed suit, of course.
Gore's plan is a radical departure from the old approaches. Because the working poor and the lower middle classes pay most of their taxes as payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare, the carbon tax substitution would not be regressive for people who work. Fixed income seniors would get hit hard, however, and some offsets might be needed to pay for high heating fuel costs for the elderly and disabled.
Gore has the international visibility that no one else has. It's pretty clear that Al Gore has been developing a global warming policy team, so I'm not sure what Matt is thinking we should do. I have the credentials to help if needed.