• on a comment on Open Thread over 6 years ago

    You can't suggest Jerome.  Something is singular.  Jerome has said more than one thing today.

  • comment on a post You'd think, graphs included over 6 years ago

    OK, well 28% sounds like a lot.  But that's 28% of Democratic primary voters who support Clinton.  Which is only roughly half of all Democratic primary voters.  Which, in turn, represents, what, like 20% of the total general election voting population?  And at least half of them are just blowing smoke.  

    50% of 28% of 50% of 20% is not very many actual people.

  • comment on a post The General Election Has Begun over 6 years ago

    Fewer jobs, more wars, goddamn it.

  • comment on a post Post-Debate Polls: Huckabee By A Mile over 6 years ago

    I've been saying for a year that Huckabee is the most talented of the Republican contenders.  I think it's obvious to anyone who's ever seen him speak.  He was straight up awesome on his Daily Show appearance too.

    Other candidates misunderestimate him at their peril - Republican or Democratic.

  • comment on a post Who Got It Right on Election Day 2007? over 6 years ago

    SurveyUSA was the best (or among the best) in 2006 too.

  • on a comment on Senate Votes To...Condemn An Ad? over 6 years ago

    I would have done the same thing.  This kind of crap is a total waste of the Senate's time when there are so many important things going on.  I would have expressed my disgust by not even giving the issue the dignity of a vote.

  • comment on a post Edwards Touts Red State Appeal over 6 years ago

    The last three Democratic presidents have been Southerners, yet our electoral fortunes in the South have only diminished during that time.

    Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.

  • comment on a post All Hell Breaking Loose In Michigan over 6 years ago

    Chaos is good. The presidential primary system we have now is stupid and needs to be broken. Actually, that's being generous to call it stupid. Really, it's borderline racist.

    What do Michigan and Florida have that Iowa and New Hampshire don't? Minorities and lots of electoral votes.

  • One of the front-pagers promoted it for you since it was big news and you were apparently the first to diary it.

  • Florida 2000 is the perfect example of what I'm talking about.  A left-wing third party candidate ran, and the consequence was the election of a hard-right candidate that was the antithesis of his political views.  The effect was the EXACT OPPOSITE of what he intended.  Are you saying that Nader voters really wanted George W. Bush to be president?

    Furthermore, non-establishment candidates can and do work within the existing coalitions to change the status-quo, that's what primaries are about.  Think about Jim Webb or Jon Tester, who both beat the party-preferred establishment candidates in their respective races, then went on to win the general election.  If they had run third party campaigns, we'd have had two more conservative Republicans incumbents reelected in 2006.

    Some countries have a parliamentary system where multiple parties join together to form a majority government after the election, and sometimes a viable third party can take shape in such a system.  However, the only real difference is that coalitions are formed after elections instead of before.  So, in our two-party system voters actually have more information when casting their vote (they know which coalition they're voting for).

  • Third parties in elections have the exact opposite effect of competition in a market because of the majority-rule winner-take-all nature of elections.  A third party hurts the major party candidate most similar to the third party candidate and helps the least similar candidate preferred by the smaller number of people.  In other words, we get Florida 2000.

    Unless we have a radical overhaul of how we handle elections (e.g. proportional representation), basic game theory shows that third parties will always hurt their own cause.

    Furthermore, third parties are unnecessary since parties are coalitions.

  • Maybe it's an impetus for a party to the left of Democrats, but Unity08 is a center-right construction, which has no interest in working on any of those issues.

    Has there ever been an election that wasn't touted as the perfect opportunity for a third party to finally emerge?  Funny how it keeps being predicted, but never happens...

  • on a comment on A Simple Question... over 7 years ago

    He will resign?  I find your faith in the president a little unfounded.

  • comment on a post Questions for Nancy Pelosi over 7 years ago

    Ask her about the public financing/fair elections bills in the pipe right now (I think HR 1614 is the bill in the house right now.)

  • comment on a post Fire, Ripples, and Mike Gravel over 7 years ago

    "Senator Gravel - are you a crazy person?"


Advertise Blogads