DISQUS

LabourList appears, at 11am, to be off-air altogether. Coincidence?


wv, spookily, = mistsho

Can any psephological geniuses confirm or deny the following snippet posted by yorkshirebeard in that LabHome thread? Surely the prospect of Brown retaining the premiership after getting 31% votes versus Conservative 37% would send piano-wire makers' shares skyrocketing.
***

"Using tools provided by UK Poll Monitor:



"Assuming a uniform swing, the following result would give Labour the most seats in a hung parliament, and therefore Brown would remain Prime Minister



Con 37%

Lab 31%

Lib 25 %

Other 7%"

Very true, Guido. I used to admire the RSA. A few years ago I was approached by both the RSA and Common Purpose to become members. I went and had a look at first hand by attending a few events before making a commitment. Fairly quickly it became obvious that there was massive group think going on in both organisations, and that it was assumed you would fit into a particular broad-left big-state view of the world. As the man from the Mirror used to say, "I made my excuses and left".

S:


Check out my blog if you want to have a serious, prolonged discussion about the "surge" and "progress". Eat your vegetables, do your push-ups, and be prepared to bring some considerable intellectual rigor into the arena. Suffice it to say that a similar propaganda campaign was used during conduct of the Vietnam War forty years ago. Facts on the ground are completely disconnected from reality as shown by John McCain saying he never felt "safer" in Baghdad while esconced by troops and a chopper overhead and the street closed to traffic.

He just won this thing. If he teams with moderate Republican and Vietnam War veteran Chuck Hagel then Barack he makes Change tangible and wins by a huge electoral margin this fall.

What President Bush did was wreckless. The primacy of Israel in Middle Eastern affairs is sacrosanct no matter who occupies the White House. The president knows this. By using a foreign platform, the Knesset no less, to make a domestic partisan point Bush has encouraged Israel to take ill advised risks to protect itself. That is why he has been roundly criticized. To imply that Israel would be less secure if a Democrat is in office promotes Israel to make more aggressive manuevers with the obvious adverse outcomes.


This is the sad legacy of the current president. Not merely the confluence of international and domestic disturbances which are arguably beyond his control. But the Rove doctrine of using every implement to advance partisan objectives. We saw the same thing in the actions of the Justice Department to target Democrats in public office. Bush certainly has a right and duty to lead his party to victory. However, that should not be done at the expense of inciting a global conflict which is what he did.



As for my friends who think that Obama is immune to the politics of personal destruction, you are sadly mistaken. Karl Rove's greatest contribution was that you attack your enemy's strengths. So a tremendous intellect like Gore is mutated into a geek or a decorated war veteran like Kerry is called into doubt about the bona fides of said service. Conversely, your candidate's weaknesses become virtues. So G.W. Bush's inexperience and inarticulateness makes him more connected with the common man.



At JJP it is all too easy to become enthralled with Obama's strengths and not see how they could be used against him. No doubt the political landscape is being realigned but don't become too carried away and think that Obama's considerable charm or guile will simply disarm his opponent. What will bring Obama victory is winning over Independents and disillusioned Republicans. Certainly Obama can and will compete nationally but Appalachia and Florida are probably out of reach. This means he needs to break into Republican strongholds and that will not happen because Barack is the man.

Au contraire, NK. Hillary Rodham Clinton has provided the GOP with a blueprint. That is a relentless, excoriating attack on Obama's character. HRC's mistake was that she started the scorched earth strategy too late. It would have been different if she seized the initiative. She made great but ultimately futile progress. Republican operatives will not wait for Barack to gain momentum before eviscerating him.

Maybe I'm reading too much into this, but I seriously think that Obama is going to choose Chuck Hagel as his running mate. Note his acknowledgment of a bipartisanship approach to foreign policy while objecting vigorously to Bush/McCain. While speaking of failed Bush policies he avoids disparaging Republicans.


The old ways will not do, and Senator Obama is changing the political calculus. Hagel represents the vanguard of Republicans who are sensible and don't need controversial cultural issues to provide legitimacy. Also with a distinguished Vietnam War record of his own, Hagel is the perfect counter to McCain. Additionally, unlike Wesley Clark, Hagel has the proven skill for tough negotiation which is critical in Washington.



As tough as the primary was, this fall campaign will prove to be more arduous. This is no time for political neophytes like Clark or servile adherence to a safe, little known Midwestern Democrat. Obama needs the big joker to win this thing. Only a bold choice like Hagel will solidly confirm Obama's vision and suck the oxygen from McCain. Obama/Hagel '08.

This was an excellent post with superb and refreshing commentary from the readers. You folks really made me think. Here is something to bring levity to such a vigorous and bright exchange. Keep up the strong work, JJP and readers.

She needs some good advice.

I too am feeling a little down, but I just posted something for encouragement. Ronnie B thanks for the uplift.

I'd like to share this. In light of the recent charge of elitism thrown at Senator Obama, I'm concerned that we need the anchor of history to prevent us from losing our equilibrium. Obama's ascendancy is certainly a good thing for America. It would be the end of beginning to tear down the pillar of racism that our country was founded upon. Racism is a boil that must be lanced and the ugly truths, including black co-conspirators, must be extruded. But it would be an unforgivable error on our part to miss out on how class oppression is tied into this mess.

The Clinton's built a bridge to the 21st century - Barack Obama IS the 21st century.






Wow! I've never heard that before. That is the puchline which you have to skillfully apply during your discourse. If appropriate, use it at the opening but maybe not in the middle where it's likely to be overlooked. Definitely use it in your closing remarks. I hope Barack's people are reading this or watching tonight because this is a line that has great potential for his partisans on the public airwave battle. Pass it along to his campaign managers if possible.



If Jeremiah Wright comes up then be prepared to quote MLK. And if antisemitism makes an appearance be absolutely sure to name Pat Buchanan and how his past responses could be considered antisemitic.

Did Condi Rice covertly endorse Obama?

The Dems are in the middle of civil war.

I would refer you to an underrated Orson Wells film, The Magnificent Ambersons. It depicts what happens to an aristocracy when confronted with change not of its own design and the prospect of being displaced by an elite which derives it prestige not from family ties and origin but by its ability to harness the forces of industry and capitalism.


The Clinton donors face the same existential threat in Obama. For what is the good of being a millionaire or billionaire if an upstart candidate can come along and raise more money from small donors and secure the nomination if not the presidency? Gone will be the days of having to come hat in hand to a small cadre of the ultra-rich. They need Obama the way a stagecoach manufacturer needed the automobile. This is why Hillary Rodham Clinton is still in the campaign. It's not just her and Bill's future at stake but a whole political landscape dominated by the power elite but marketed as democracy.

Does anyone know how many of the superdelegates are black? And if the CBC came out en bloc and declared that they were withdrawing their support from Clinton would her campaign be viable? If so then shouldn't we take our aim at the chinks in the Clinton armor: the CBC and Democrat congressional and campaign leadership of Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean? Because with the most recent attack on the black church it's clear that Hillary and Bill are playing get some. Yet if the CBC is in her corner, it makes it nearly impossible to have the charge of race baiting, except if she overtly called him a nigger, become an albatross around her neck.

Terrence, what country have you been in for the last ten years? The Clinton's are fiercely embraced by the large segment of the black populace despite the deleterious effects of welfare reform and mandatory prison sentencing which were enacted by Bill. It was Hillary flying in a chopper telling Barack to 'get some' that got folks started. And even now, I have yet to hear of any black superdelegate say that they are withdrawing their support from HRC.


So Terrence you are going to have to raise your game to at least JV level to hang out in this forum. It's not that I have a problem with contrary opinion; I've got a problem with completely unsubstantiated remarks like yours that try to pass for fact or serious social commentary and analysis. That's just weak. Sort of like HRC herself at this juncture.

Everyone, please write your elected officials and let them know in no uncertain terms that if HRC is on the ticket then we are done with them for life. I live in Maryland. My governor and congressman and senator endorsed Clinton. I have written them stating that I cannot remain a Democrat or support their future efforts if this is allowed to pass.


The CBC is particularly galling. They are merely interested in patronage. And where the fuck is Tavis Smiley's State of the Black Union when this shit is going down? I knew he was full of shit when he was talking skeptically about Barack's platform on home foreclosure and healthcare against a backdrop that promoted his sponsors, Wells Fargo and McDonalds. And to talk about Iraq and conveniently not mention his other sponsor, ExxonMobil, was also self serving.



The thing is that a day of reckoning is upon us. Maxine Waters and others politicians can talk all that pro-Black bullshit but the proof is their silence on this latest reckless and ill-conceived move by the Clinton camp. Someone earlier was right in pointing out that if a faintly antisemitic remark was uttered then swift universal rebuttal would have ensued. But with us it seems we are now encrusted with black apologists for Democratic racist smears.



For anyone out there who lives in one of these kneegrows' districts and has aspirations for assuming their offices please drop your email address or a link to your organization. As Barack has shown, sometimes a thing just grows. An entity arises from a discrete voice saying, "I can." And it replicates in viral fashion to overwhelm a nation. Barack has given us a blueprint for action. Let's use it. I promise right now that if you are legit that I will lend you a hand. Let's purge these second and third line muhfuckin inheritors of the Civil Rights Movement from the body politic.

Bill Clinton's legacy will be that of a racist. Hillary Clinton's legacy will be that of a racist.


Party leaders must act now to end this before the party is destroyed. Super Delegates were created after Ted Kennedy took a wounded and fruitless candidacy to the convention in 1980. Super Delegates have the job of stopping wounded and fruitless candidacies, like that of Senator Clinton.



Amen, bagofhealthandpolitics. Hilary and Bill won't go peacefully. It's time for the leadership to denounce and reject their and Barack needs to take this opportunity to appear presidential and make a measured careful speech on the matter and show us his supporters why we need him and risk his political capital and make a speech on primetime in Indiana about racial reconciliation and moving away from using blacks as political football. The Clinton's have set race reconciliation back to the Eighties and are pushing it to the George Wallace style Fifties. The CBC en bloc, including HRC kneegrows, must NOT FUCK UP! This is making me boiling mad. TAVIS SMILEY needs to STAND THE FUCK UP and in his words "question" Hillary Rodham Clinton on this decided turn for the worse.

D. you need to go back to your homework, and not the high school or college kind either. Even a cursory appraisal of the Iraq War will show you that military elites wanted no such endeavor, however, they were strongarmed by civilians. In our system of governance the military is always subservient to policymakers. I would refer you to The Best and the Brightest by David Halberstam as the classic exegesis of deliberate war making by civilians. Even in his Personal Memoirs, Ulysses S. Grant relays how policymakers in Washington ordered US Army troops to the Texas border on a pretext to provoke the Mexixcan War. So don't tell me that civilians genuflect to the recommendations of the military.


Notwithstanding HRC's race-baiting, the most important story is this one posted by Rikyrah. Like the EADS contract for USAF refeulers and this one, it is the underreported story that is of most significance. It's not that we will go to war with Iran next week or next month. It's just that all the assets are being moved into place such that it makes an unstable situation even worse.



As for the utility of war, we are a war socialist economy so the costs is a relative term. Some sectors benefit greatly from such activity. Check out http://subrealism.blogspot.com/ for some more on this.

This is a very, very dangerous and unsteady posture to assume. A classic Gulf of Tonkin move: create a provocation to incite Iran and turn to the American public and say, "See what they did?" And launch a 'just' war.


This is why people who say that there is no difference between Dems and Repubs or Hillary and Barack are wrong. The commander-in-chief reference that she dropped last week was a thinly veiled expression for willingness to go to war. That is why Hillary put herself and McCain ahead of Obama and why she will never be the nominee. Nancy Pelosi has practically ruled Hillary out.



There is some serious jockeying among the elites right now. The outcome is no longer in the voters hands. The Dems are in the tenuous position of extirpating the hawks in their midst. Hard to do this without disemboweling itself, to be sure. The chess match isn't just between the candidates but what they represent. The Dean and Pelosi wing will never countenance the Clintons. That is why Lieberman had to go and Hillary has to go. But you can't just expel them. This is Shakespearean drama being played out in real life: King Richard the Second(Clinton) versus Bolingbroke (Obama).

I think the Democratic Party is in the middle of some tricky surgery right about now. But the patient is Hillary and the scalpel is Florida.

Hate to burst everyone's fun but it's a wrap. With a story like this contrasted against Barack's ability to help Dems pick up a net gain from Dennis Hastert's district while not even yet POTUS, it's clearr for all to see. Too late for Hillary to step down gracefully and remain in Washington. She's outta here.

For Anon 8:16, your gal Hillary done answered your question. Check this out and tell me one unsubstantiated point.


Hillary is losing all credibility. She is becoming a grotesque joke. If she wants to still be influential and remain a senator, then she must quit the race by the end of March. Any potential gain she achieves in Pennsylvania will evaporate the following month in Indiana and North Carolina.



The outcome has been mathematically decided. She's gotta go freely or face eviction. And with the new scandal involving Gov. Spitzer, the media no longer has a vested interest in perpetuating the illusion of a viable Hillary.



This race was effectively decided in February. It was a Gettysburg moment. Sure the campaign continued, but the end was foretold. None other than Bill Clinton said that Hillary needed overwhelming victories in Texas and Ohio on March 4 in order to have a chance. That didn't happen.



I'm sorry for you and other Hillary supporters. The mainstream media and the Clintons colluded in deception. They made you think she had a real shot at winning legitimately. But now the media is moving on to fresh meat and is no longer propping up the house of cards.



Make no mistake. The convention is a coronation. The Clintons have made their supporters believe that something could be finessed at the convention but that hasn't been true since the Sixties.



Essentially Bill and Hillary have been hoping for the Democratic Party elites to do Barack what the Supreme Court did to Al Gore: ratify an outcome not supported by the numbers. This just can't happen without destroying the party apparatus.



If she cares about you and her supporters and is indeed the one to do the things that you describe, then Hillary needs to exercise the moral courage of a Robert E. Lee at Appomattox and concede the prize to Barack by the end of this month. They can put aside past differences and work together for the good of the nation and secure a Democrat victory.



But this relentless, win-at-all-costs thrust for the nomination is more becoming of a recklesss gambling addict doubling their bets after losing than an honest sober leader.