Preferential Interests

Lessons from the GOP Nomination contest

2012-01-27T17:45:00.003-06:00

Now that it's over (and it is over), here's what are some lessons learned from the GOP nomination fight in 2012:

1. The Party Decides. The Party Decides. Seriously, The Party Decides. Despite what appeared to be a chaotic race, with no less than 7 different national front-runners, despite the sturm and drang about the "Tea Party", despite the lack of enthusiasm for Romney, the Republican Party coalesced around a compromise candidate with decent campaigning skills who positioned himself so as to not offend any major party interest group.

You couldn't have created a better test for the "Party Decides" framework: Romney's weaknesses, longstanding fractures within the Republican Party, and miserable economic conditions were a perfect storm to upset the system. And yet, as we see party actors from all spectrums of the Republican party turn to destroy Newt after his improbably South Carolina win, the theory seems as safe as ever.

2. The Invisible Primary is the Most Important Primary. By the time people actually started voting the number of possible nominees had dropped to two: Romney and Perry. Romney successfully cajoled, bribed, threatened, or just flat out beat most of his potential competitors before a single delegate was selected. I'm reasonably certain he forced out Barbour and Thune, and I know he beat Pawlenty by drying up his donor base. Huckabee had his own reasons, and I won't even speculate that Palin has a coherent thought process, but they both ran and lost in the invisible primary as well. Others, like Jindal or Christie, might've thought about running and been told not to early on.

3. SuperPACs. SuperPACs have played an outsized role in this nomination contest, and it's not clear why. So far they haven't really done anything that 527s couldn't do in the past. (527s couldn't say "Vote for X" but they could say "X is an evil jerk".) The invisible monsters that don't report donors and savaged Democrats in 2010 haven't been playing in the Republican contest. But it seems like some sort of psychological barrier has been broken.

While it hasn't really ever been illegal for a rogue billionaire to decide to single-handedly prop up a candidate, what has happened between Newt Gingrich and Sheldon Adelson has been remarkable. One of the ways in which the parties retain control of the nomination process is the way political donations are structured. Since people can only give a couple thousand dollars to a candidate, it requires candidates to appeal to a fairly wide swathe of middle class partisans in order to have enough money to seriously compete for the nomination.

Newt was never going to be the nominee. But we may have returned to the era where Joe Kennedy can buy his son a Presidential Nomination. (Hear that, John Huntsman, Sr.?)

4. You Can't Jump In Late. It's a perennial fantasy. Wes Clark, Fred Thompson, and now Rich Perry stand as monumental failures. Your best polling will be on the day you announce. If you're going to run, then run.

The most obvious point of this, as it applies to Perry, is that if you start running earlier, you get to have your big mistakes earlier. If Perry had managed to screw up a few debates before anyone was paying attention, he could have a year to recover and find his game. (Rumor has it that he didn't jump in the race because he was having back surgery, and then his painkillers from recovery were the cause of some of his odd behavior.)

But it goes beyond that: people who jump in late have a harder time raising money, the best staff is taken, some key party elements have already committed, etc. If you're going to run, then run.

5. Don't Get Drafted. Jon Huntsman's campaign to be the Republican for people who don't like Republicans was pretty awful. But that wasn't his fault! He was in China when the campaign started, and could not legally speak to the people trying to get him to run about campaign strategy. By the time he started running, they'd created the McCain 2000 retread. Despite the fact that McCain lost, and that the GOP has gotten more conservative, Huntsman was more-or-less forced to play they hand they dealt him.

5a. Don't hire John Weaver.

6. GOP Voters are Hyper-Informed. I do not mean that they are correct, especially about basic facts about reality. But rather, GOP partisans watch partisan TV, listen to partisan radio, and read partisan newspapers and blogs. The people who vote in the GOP nomination process really follow the race. That is what produced the surges last year, and that's why state-level results have been tracking so well to national results. Things like the ground game and local group participation matter much less when the potential electorate is filled with highly informed voters.

7. The Candidates Don't Get to Pick the Issues. I don't just mean Romney's well-publicized flip-flop on abortion. Anyone not named Rudy Giuliani could tell you that the GOP isn't going to nominate a pro-choice candidate any time soon. What was more interesting was the backlash against Gingrich for his rejection of the Ryan budget, or Perry's cratering in the polls for favoring a more moderate stance against illegal immigration.

As a corollary to #6, the rise of highly polarized national parties with highly informed partisan voters means that candidates have much less leeway to choose their positions than they used to.

8. Ron Paul is The Future. In the alternative future where only people who are under the age of 30 can vote, Ron Paul has won every contest to date. The GOP has been losing younger voters consistently since 2004 (this is a new phenomenon, despite the stereotypes, there historically hasn't been that big of a partisan difference between age cohorts in voting over the past 40 years). And of the young voters who are open to being Republicans, they favor an unconventional candidate with issue positions far outside of the GOP mainstream.

I've been saying for years that if the GOP wants to keep being able to win national elections, they'll need to convince Hispanic people to start voting like White people. Bush (and Perry) seemed to understand this, even if the rest of the party has rejected it this time around. But now it seems that unless the GOP does something about its issue positions — purge the neo-cons, or roll back the drug war — it will become a rump party for a generation.

Gun Control: Failure of the state

2011-07-09T02:01:00.004-05:00

Gun control is the most obvious failure of the state in modern America, right?

From the 1960s to the 1990s, America, especially in its cities, experienced a dramatic rise in violent crime. The violent and deadly nature of this crime was accompanied by the wide availability of firearms.

The best response to this sort of thing is to stop people from engaging in crime; it's possible that the rise was driven by lead, or many other factors, but finding and identifying those sort of origin aspects of this are difficult.

Another thing to do, and what most other countries did, would have been to get rid of all the guns -- even if people were going to be crazy, if you take away the ability, the desire doesn't matter.

But we couldn't do that either. The American political system was so broken that individuals didn't trust the government enough to deal with the problem. Instead, it created a backlash that created a desire to increase the availability of firearms.

It's a pretty clear example of a failure of state legitimacy. And now, even though the crime crisis has passed, I still have to deal with a bunch of crazy people who now use the issue of gun control to validate their "fear" of the state.

(I know that they don't have a real fear of the state, because they don't care about other "Civil Liberties" at all.)

Origins of Political Order: Mistaken About Evolution

2011-07-06T15:09:00.001-05:00

I just finished Part 1 of Francis Fukuyama’s Origins of Political Order. First off, I like the book. He’s an evolutionist, and a Hobbesian, which is to say that he understands human nature, and he bases his theory of the state upon that foundation.

Now, a mistake: Fukuyama’s description of human evolution is wrong. It’s only a little bit wrong, but it’s totally wrong. Fukuyama tells the familiar “one tribe out of Africa” story. We now know this is wrong, because we have genetic evidence of interbreeding with Neandertals, not to mention Denisovians, and presumably dozens of biologically modern Homo Sapien tribes that left Africa at different times.

Of course, Fukuyama’s book was published a month before that paper came out, and presumably written a while before.

On the other hand…

For a genetic example of what happens when one people conquers another, we need look no further than the high frequency of European Y chromosomes in the Americas. I would expect most pre-historic genetic exchanges to follow similar models. When an anthropologist says “population displacement,” we should interpret that to mean “they killed all the men and raped and married the women.” This means that conquerors not only take their enemies’ land, they also absorb genetic information, which is then selected for.

Fukuyama is exactly the sort of person who ought to have doubted the old story. Rome claimed to have founded itself upon a crime of mass rape. And the old testament doesn’t shy away from what to do with conquered people. Fukuyama actually quotes Genghis Khan and notes his massive offspring.

So, while one can hardly blame Fukuyama for making this error, since it was the conventional scientific view, if he had been following his own method of science+anthropology+historical analysis more rigorously, he might not have.

Of Kellys and Kellys

2011-03-24T01:35:00.003-05:00

So I grew up with a gal named Kelly and I have a friend named Kelly and I was thinking about what would happen to various Kellys.

My friend Kelly recently gave up the teevee because he doesn’t think it’s good for his kids. But it’s great for me because he gave me a bunch of DVDs. These exist in a legal gray area which I describe as “these are mine until Kelly wants them back.” I’ve even lent out a couple of these DVDs to a dude named Spencer. Spence watches DVDs quickly and will have them back soon. But anyway, there are a bunch of Kelly DVDs at my house right now and I basically treat them as my own property.

What would happen if Kelly were to, for some reason, contact the police and tell them that I stole his DVDs (probably worth hundreds of dollars)? The DVDs are his, he’s got the receipts. All I’ve got is an explanation that he said I could have them. I’m pretty sure the law would side with him.

What if Kelly was a girl and I had sex with her? Even though the harm to the victim is much worse (rape being worse than theft), the rules change! If you’re taking sex from someone instead of property, the law presumes consent, and it’s up to the victim to prove they said no.

Now I say the fact that the victim is complaining to the police is pretty good proof that they were not on board with the whole thing. But this is where most “liberal” men I know get off the progressive train. And I’d like to know why.

How to cook a meaty tofu

2011-03-21T00:23:00.006-05:00

And the question was asked: "My skills are totally lacking in the tofu dept. I've only used soft stuff in miso soup. What do you recommend for a more 'meaty' tofu?"

Good question! First, you're going to need to get yourself some firm tofu. You can buy it for $4 at a white person grocery store. I buy it a case at a time for a dollar a pack at the Asian grocery store. You can also buy "Extra Firm" tofu, which I am convinced is a marketing gag.

Once you've got the right kind of tofu, you need to "press" it to remove excess water. If you hate trees you can wrap it in paper towels and then put a cutting board on top of it to remove the extra water. The longer it presses the better. I usually wait about 30 minutes. Since I don't hate trees I have a couple of cloths that I use for the purpose.

Now your tofu is pressed. Cut it up into pieces, in whatever shape you want it in. If you end up dry frying it (see below) you'll want it thin. Vanessa thinks it's cute when I cut it into triangles.

Now, the cooking. You have a many options, but I'm going to suggest three: Baking, Oil Fry, and Dry Fry.

Baking is the easiest. Get yerself a marinade. I like to throw soy sauce, cooking wine, vinegar, garlic, etc. into a baking dish. Let the tofu hang out in there. Who knows, you could get crazy and add a lime. Stick it in the oven to bake. The longer it bakes, the better it tastes, but the lower the temperature needs to be. Stick it in for 375 for 30 minutes, and subtract 25 degrees for every extra 30 minutes you can leave it in there. I'm not a scientist or anything, but I think 250 degrees is about the lowest you should go. Check it every 30 minutes. Throw it in anything you want.

Frying takes a bit more attention, but is way quicker than baking. Rice takes 35 minutes and I can usually start the rice and be done with the stir-fry before the rice is done.

First, you need a cooking pot. I use a fairly fancy wok, but that's because I'm a huge snob. The most important thing is that whatever you use has to be nonstick. Tofu sticks and it is no fun.

Dry frying is healthy, easy, and fully discussed here.

Most of the time I fry the tofu in oil. Get your pot out, coat the bottom in oil. Vegetable oil fries the best, but I like olive because I like the taste. Plus it lets me claim all of my dishes are Greek-Chinese fusion. The oil should be hottttt, just hot enough to not splatter all over you when you drop the tofu in. Flip the tofu around fairly frequently until it's a golden brown. Then drop in whatever spices you want. Most recipes will tell you to take the tofu out at this point and add it to your stir-fry later, but I'm lazy and just throw the next group of ingredients in at this point.

If you want to be super-fancy you can bread your tofu (after you press and cut it) in a mix of corn starch and spices. Then fry it as above. The first time you try this you'll screw it up because either it'll stick together or you'll get too much corn starch in the oil and the whole thing'll turn to mush. But once you get the hang of it you'll amaze the neighbors.

I've also got a deep fryer that I use from time to time, and my world renowned tofu scrambles, but those are stories for a different day.

The case for Bonapartism

2011-03-19T17:34:00.002-05:00

I’ve mentioned this to several people already, so I thought I’d take the time to explain myself online.

Basically, the prevailing “Democratic Peace” theory holds that Democracies tend not to go to war, and don’t ever go to war with each other. This theory may or may not still hold, depending on how “democratic” Serbia was when we bombed them in the 1990s or whether or not Russia and Georgia count as democracies. I tend to think the theory is at least partially true, as democracies at least tend to evaluate their own interests similarly. But even if you don’t think there’s a current example, it’s at least possible to imagine two democracies going at it – most wars have popular support when they’re started, after all.

In contrast to the prevailing theory, these guys argue that young democracies are actually more likely to go to war than other states. If you ignore the mythologizing about democracy, it makes sense. When a country goes democratic the rulers change, and the new government is likely to perceive the interests and global order of the country differently than the previous state. Ideological re-alignment brings instability to stable regions and can therefore easily lead to wars. This probably applies to the shift to any new governing order as well (think of Communist Russia’s survival war after the Russian Civil War, Mao picking a fight with Russia, et cetera, et cetera).

The textbook case for this is, of course, Revolutionary France. Following the extinction of the French monarchy most of Europe declared war on France, which started a spiral of events that eventually led to Emperor Napoleon conquering most of Europe and cheerfully extinguishing monarchies all over the place. Napoleon was able to do this because spreading France’s revolutionary ideals was tremendously popular in France – France was the first nation to be able to fully mobilize for war. Killing kings is fun, apparently.

Egypt is a big country – 80 million people – twice as large as the next largest Arab country. Its politics and culture dominate the Arab world. In short, it occupies the same place in Arab culture as France held in European culture in 1800. Its military is big, modern, American armed, and American trained. Israel is basically the only country in the region that could hope to beat it. It has the capability to be an army of Arab liberation.

Egypt’s culture has been pan-Arabic for as long as it has been independent. They merged with Syria for a couple of years, invaded Libya, and supported a democratic uprising in Yemen. This is not likely to change. What is changing however, is that they are likely to be led by a revolutionary government soon.

Egypt is about to be a big country with a modern army ruled by people who view all Arabs as brothers and democracy as a birthright of humankind. Where is Lt. Bonaparte?

The only thing lacking in this scenario is the triggering event to send Egypt’s army on the march. For Revolutionary France, it was other European countries declaring war on the young republic.

The United Nations just declared Libya a no-fly zone. While it looks like France, Britain, and America will enforce the no-fly zone, they’ve basically ruled out sending in ground troops. Eventually ground troops will, in fact, be necessary (the alternative is portioning Libya). Neither Obama nor Sarkozy nor Cameron have any interest in sending in ground troops, the memory of Iraq is still fresh enough to prevent that – which leaves a “volunteer” “arab” force. Which means next-door Egypt.

And a week later the Arab world finally gets the hero this revolution needs – the great liberator of Benghazi. Where does he stop? Don’t the people of Yemen deserve freedom? Doesn’t the house of Saud pollute the holy land? Aren’t the Sudanese really just “Upper Egyptians”?

Some people think Egypt will become a member of the great democracy club. Other people worry about the Muslim Brotherhood turning it into the next Iran. No one seems to be worrying about an Egyptian Bonaparte, but they should be. I'm not saying it's the most likely possibility, but it's certainly a possibility.

Isn't there a soul in there?

2011-01-09T14:30:00.002-06:00

When a person suffers some sort of total and permanent brain damage, a la Terri Schiavo, people divide up into familiar pro-life/pro-choice groups.

This doesn't make any sense to me. Notionally, religious people claim to be committed to the views of soul-independence and soul-having-ness. That is to say, that the soul is independent of the body, and that humans have souls while they're alive. It also appears that religious folks think the soul is connected to the experiences of the body (i.e. you get to see your loved ones in heaven) in a way that requires the soul to be aware of bodily experiences, even if the mind isn't directly aware of the soul.

So if you believe all that, isn't keeping a vegetative person alive for decades a kind of torture to the soul? The usual sort of Natural Law arguments that are used to justify this bizarre beliefset don't seem to make any sort of sense here, because a vegetative person is undoubtedly being kept alive through the magic of modern science — god's will is clearly to let the person die. Alternatively, if the soul leaves the body when the mind does, then all this energy is being spent to keep unresponsive meat "alive", and that doesn't seem to make sense either.

Other sorts of "No You They Really Think This" theories are well-established, such as the notion that many pro-life activists are really anti-sex or anti-woman activists, or that the most virulent anti-gay bigots are closet cases. Clutching on to a dead person's body after it's clear that their mind is gone, seems to just be a sort of naive unwillingness to deal with reality. This mentality doesn't seem to spring forth from any sort of religious thinking, but it may be the same sort of instinct that also compels religious thinking.

Is being gay a choice?

2011-01-08T23:45:00.002-06:00

This question seems to matter to a lot of people, but I can't really see why it does.

That's not true. I know why it matters to some people.

This seems like a clear example of the Deontological/Consequentialist divide in ethics, in a popular ethical discussion.

My position is, obviously, that I don't care why. If being gay is a choice, then choosing to be gay is making someone happy, so they should go for it. Laws should arrange themselves around persons for the maximum amount of happiness possible.

But some people really seem to care if it's a choice.

Of course, I really don't believe in "choices" at all. So there's that.

Religion and Racism

2010-03-14T11:54:00.004-05:00

These results:

The authors failed to find that racial tolerance arises from humanitarian values, consistent with the idea that religious humanitarianism is largely expressed to in-group members. Only religious agnostics were racially tolerant.

Should only surprise people who've never met Christians, or never met racists, or both. The primary function of religion in society is to serve as a social community. Morality is at best a fourth-order level of concern, behind social community, metaphysics, and aesthetic appreciation.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing. Humans are social creatures, and it's nice to have a place to gather once a week with your neighbors. It's nice to know that you've got a place to get married, someone who will be with you when you die, and a place to be buried once you're gone. I suspect many closeted atheists remain that way because the positive benefits of community are so obvious and tangible.

But because so much of the appeal of religion is wrapped up in the in-group/out-group distinction, we shouldn't be surprised that this drive's uglier aspects, like racism, are found in higher proportion as well.

Test

2010-02-10T15:04:00.000-06:00

Test Post

What Is Wrong With The GOP

2009-04-24T05:02:00.001-05:00

New Column

Godless America

2009-04-11T14:17:00.002-05:00

This graph, and others like it, warm the cockles of my atheist heart.

The religion of "None" is up to 12%. And it's nice to see that Christianity has fallen to 77%. But now that "other" is at 7%, don't you think it's about time they started including Islam as an option? Gallup says that they estimate it to be less than 1%, but I've heard Muslim groups estimate it as high as 4 or 5%. They ask about Judaism, after all, and that number is steady at 2%.

Michael Steele

2009-04-01T20:49:00.003-05:00

Seeing Michael Steele out everywhere, vying to be the face of the Republican Party is just plain weird. Before Howard Dean, how many national chairs can people name?

The prominence of the national party chair for the party without the Presidency now looks to be a permanent feature of the American Electoral system, and is a consequence of the nationalization of the two parties. Only a system where the parties are ideologically cohesive could lead to a situation where the national chair mattered. In previous decades regional and ideological differences within the parties prevented this sort of thing from happening.

I also don't think it's an accident that Steele was an elected official before this. It seems likely that party chairs in the future will be minor celebrities who've run for office themselves, as opposed to the party functionaries who held the posts in the past.

Sell! Sell! Sell!

2009-03-13T14:44:00.002-05:00

I've been saying this to a number of people over the past week, but let's put it in writing: I predict that the Dow will drop below 4,000 at close at least once before the end of 2009.

Liar, Liar, Proust's on Fire

2009-03-13T14:26:00.004-05:00

Via Kottke comes this list of books people lie about having read:

1. 1984 by George Orwell (42%)
2. War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy (31%)
3. Ulysses by James Joyce (25%)
4. The Bible (24%)
5. Madame Bovary by Gustave Flaubert (16%)
6. A Brief History of Time by Stephen Hawking (15%)
7. Midnight’s Children by Salman Rushdie (14%)
8. In Remembrance of Things Past by Marcel Proust (9%)
9. Dreams from My Father by Barack Obama (6%)
10. The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins (6%)

Interestingly, I often lie about having read 1984. I've lied about it to multiple girlfriends! It's an awful book. I never plan to read it. But I plan to continue to lie about it.

I think I might occasionally lie about 2 & 3 as well, but only in circles where I'm pretty sure other people are lying about having read them as well.

I've only read parts of A Brief History of Time, but I've read enough to lie convincingly about having read it all. And right now "The Bomber" is realizing that entire conversations that we've had (that lasted hours!) were based on my ability to lie about having read Hawking.

I've read 80-90% of The Bible over the years and I can definitively state that 24% is way too low a number. Everyone lies about reading the Bible! It's a bad book. You'd have to be some kind of sick masochist to even get through Deuteronomy. And Christians are the biggest liars in the world, so when they say that they've read it, they almost certainly haven't. I know this, because I've read a lot of it, and it's easy to tell that they haven't. But Christians hate admitting that they lie almost as much as they like lying! So we'll never know how many people lie about having read the Bible, but it's got to be over 50%. Or, rather, everyone who says they've read the whole Bible is lying.

I have actually read Dreams From My Father (when Obama was just a Senate candidate in my humble state, no less), and there's no reason it should be on this list. It's an entertaining read written in easy language. So go read the book!

And number 10, The Selfish Gene, is possibly one of my favorite books that I've ever read. I read it all the way through, and I've read parts of it again for various projects that I've worked on, so I've probably read the whole thing twice. It's phenomenal! It offers a solution to almost every metaphysical problem in Ethics! Everyone should read it! Twice!

Or at least you should learn to be able to lie about having read it. That's almost as good!

How Progressive Are You?

2009-03-11T19:42:00.000-05:00

347

Claire McCaskill continues to suck

2009-03-01T22:33:00.002-06:00

From her twitter feed:

I am one of less than a dozen Senators that don't participate in the earmark process.

I guess that explains why Bi-State is broke.

Cranky Old Man

2009-02-27T17:05:00.000-06:00

John McCain's twitter feed (yes, it's really him) is hilarious.

Merry Christmas

2009-02-27T15:57:00.000-06:00

We're leaving.

Post unSOTU Thoughts

2009-02-25T01:26:00.002-06:00

1. I just finished reading Watchmen tonight, in preparation for the movie. It is as good as everyone says it is, although I'm kind of cheesed off at how much Heroes steals from the book.

2. I grabbed some carrot sticks for a snack before realizing that we're out of Ranch dressing. So, for the first time in my life, I ate Thousand Island. In case you're still living in the same ignorance that I was up until an hour ago, Thousand Island Dressing is, in fact, the Big Mac's "Special Sauce".

3. Buying fuel efficient vehicles for the feds, high-speed rail, and disaster preparation all seem like pretty fucking good ideas, if you ask me.

Who's Year Is It?

2009-02-23T13:27:00.004-06:00

Not even nominated, Beyoncé managed to steal the show last night at the Oscar's.

And yes, Cadillac Records was a much better movie than any of the Best Picture nominees last night, let alone the contrived "poverty porn" Slumdog Millionaire.

I loved Sean Penn's acceptance speech, though.

Presidential Rankings

2009-02-18T13:53:00.003-06:00

This bit of silliness, C-Span's 2009 Presidential Rankings, is making the rounds. Not only is the concept stupid, but they are wrong. FDR belongs at the top of the list. Everyone knows that.

C-Span and all the media reports that I've read have attached some mystical significance to the fact that they asked "Historians", as if someone who specializes in Ancient Rome or Medieval China has any clue who the Presidents were, or what they did. Even if these guys are specialists in American History, they all have their biases.

Two seemingly unanswerable questions keep popping up in the media reports: Why did Grant go up ten spaces, and why did Hayes fall seven? These questions are easily answered if you regard the historians as mere mortals.

Grants reputation has been almost single-handedly rescued by this 2006 blog post by Nathan Newman. It flew across the liberal blogosphere after he posted it. It certainly affected my thinking of Grant, and I've been selling Newman's insights as my own for two and a half years now. Those mystical "Historians" are plugged into this stuff as well, and their opinions are malleable enough to raise Grant's standing by quite a lot.

And Hayes? RutherFRAUD B. Hayes stole the 1876 election. After eight years of Bush, who stole the 2000 election, that facts looks a lot more salient.

YEAR OF BEYONCE WATCH

2009-02-16T14:01:00.001-06:00

Further Proof

Israel's Elections

2009-02-11T01:23:00.003-06:00

So, it's a near tie, with Kadima barely winning a plurality, but Likud and the parties to its right winning more seats. Not to put too fine a point on it, but all of those guys are assholes. Kadima and Labor started the Gaza war in order to show the Israeli electorate that they were tough enough on the Palestinians that the public didn't need to vote for Likud. This apparently had the result of boosting the right-wing so much that an Israeli Nationalist (ultra right) fringe party, Beiteinu, actually came out ahead of Labor, bumping them back to fourth place.

Nice going, Ehud, you fuck.

Whatever Israeli coalition forms out of this mess will look something like this:

Why Does Claire McCaskill Suck So Much? (4)

2009-02-09T21:42:00.002-06:00

Amusingly for me, McCaskill merits ridicule in Kos's quick hits from today:

I'm so relieved that we have Sens. Claire McCaskill and Ben Nelson in our party protecting us from the tyranny of building and renovating schools. Oh, and life-saving medical care.

And remember, McCain won Nebraska by 15 points. Nelson's excuse to being a douche bag is that his state is horribly Republican. What's Claire's?

Hey, this guy's pretty smart

2009-02-09T19:36:00.003-06:00

Watching the Obama press conference is surreal. I can't recall hearing Bush make a single comment as insightful as any of Obama's answers.

Madelyn points out that you can see him thinking. You can literally (Joe Biden!) see him thinking.

Update: Pssst, Mr. President. They're over there.

Dean for HHS

2009-02-09T14:45:00.000-06:00

They make websites...

Why Does Claire McCaskill Suck So Much? (3)

2009-02-08T12:35:00.002-06:00

Show Me Progress (a local blog) and Matthew Yglesias are getting in on the act.

Man, lying in your twitter feed is some pretty sick shit, right?

Why Does Claire McCaskill Suck So Much? (2)

2009-02-07T16:10:00.000-06:00

Atrios is also wondering...

I'm confused

2009-02-06T15:35:00.000-06:00

How did this not come out during the camepaign?

Why Does Claire McCaskill Suck So Much?

2009-02-06T12:13:00.004-06:00

When I was working for the Obama Campaign, I was shocked to find that many of Missouri's Democrats (and these are hardcore activist types) actually like their Junior Senator.

People were not happy when I pointed out that she, in fact, sucks as a Senator. Her latest round of populist "let's cap executive pay" media blitz annoyed the shit out of me, since she has one of the most pro-corporate records of the Democrats in the Senate. I had hoped that the age of Obama would mean a change for McCaskill as well, considering how much she seems to like Obama personally.

Apparently not. I see plenty of Senators on that list from states that are a lot redder than Missouri, who have managed to get with the fucking program.

Iowa's Junior Senator

2009-02-05T14:00:00.005-06:00

You know, I've always liked Tom Harkin.

Makes me feel better about the $25 I gave him back in '03.

What don't you fucking understand?

2009-02-05T13:06:00.001-06:00

This is a thing of fucking beauty. You should listen to it at full blast in the office.

Acoustic Krypton

2009-02-04T11:38:00.002-06:00

It truly is the year of Beyoncé.

ZOMG BEST DAY EVER

2009-02-04T01:38:00.002-06:00

I feel like I've been waiting my whole lifetime for this moment. It's here.

Waterworld: Extended Edition

It's like they can read my freaking mind:

Daschle

2009-02-03T15:19:00.002-06:00

It seemed to me that their was a very good case for appointing Tom Daschle to HHS, despite his somewhat scummy history. That argument was a simple one: Daschle, better than anybody else, knows how to move things through the Senate. And since the Senate is the biggest stumbling block to achieving Universal Health Care right now, Daschle was perfect for the job.

But if the guy couldn't even move his own confirmation through the Senate, then all of the positive arguments for him absolutely collapse.

Good to see him go.

Did you know?

2009-02-02T14:59:00.002-06:00

Al Franken is the fourth Jew to hold his Senate seat, representing the great state of Minnesota. Less than 1% of Minnesotans are Jewish. Weird.

Also, of the four African Americans Senators since Reconstruction, three of them have occupied the same Senate seat currently held by Roland Burris.

Superbowl Ads

2009-02-02T14:05:00.002-06:00

Is it just me, or were GoDaddy's ads last night the most hateful and misogynistic things we've seen on TV since the Republican Campaign last fall? They really ought to inspire some backlash. GoDaddy's customer base can't be entirely composed of drunken frat boys, can it?

On the other hand, I really liked PETA's rejected ad.

I know people disagree with me about this, but I've always found PETA's use of sexuality to draw attention to the plight of animals to be legitimate.

Fuck you, that's why.

2009-01-29T03:18:00.002-06:00

The stimulus package passed the House, without a single Republican vote.

My favorite post of the day is Marc Ambinder making a fool out of himself. It'd be nice if the Atlantic hired a political reporter who actually understood politics.

But, of course, nobody could've predicted this.

Philosoraptor

2009-01-28T22:28:00.000-06:00

Buy me this.

Pete Seeger

2009-01-20T02:14:00.002-06:00

People don't believe me when I tell them, but I once sang "We Shall Overcome" with Pete Seeger. He sang and played guitar. I sang along, with a girl named Heidi.

It was about 9 years ago, down in Georgia...

Nevermind, you don't believe me either.

But that doesn't mean it isn't true.

Chrystler

2009-01-20T01:50:00.002-06:00

So, right, there's something deeply wrong with me. But this was my favorite song when I was a kid (Before I was sent to school and entered society. Blame my parents.):

Memories resurrected by this.

Something nice about Bush

2009-01-20T00:59:00.006-06:00

I rarely feel anything but venom for our 43st President, so when I feel otherwise, I should probably point it out.

The speech he gave the day after Obama won the election was heartfelt, generous, and reflective of his true feelings about race in our society.

Many people have commented that Obama wouldn't be possible without Bush's epic fail. And that's true. But he also wouldn't have been possible without Bush's consistent anti-racism. It's not merely the fact that Bush appointed two African-Americans to head his State department. It's also the fact that Bush was the first Republican since Nixon to win without appealing to racism.

(The ghost of my Father says: what about dis-enfranchising black voters? I say, of course they do that, Dad, but they did that by targeting people they knew wouldn't vote for them, not by legitimizing racism in the public sphere.)

American politics is fundamentally tribal. People don't vote based on issues. They vote based on party*. How many people over the age of 30 ever change parties? Bush used his platform as the leader of the Republican party to legitimize black leadership in the eyes of the half of the country that looked to him for cues.

When the history books are written, 50 to 100 years from now, Colin and Condi are going to be viewed like we view the protoceratops in light of the triceratops**. Bush's heart, in this one little thing, was in the right place.

P.S. Of course, the Republican party is now the "Barack the Magic Negro" party. But that wasn't Bush's party.

*What about independents? Easy: They're liars. 90% of American voters vote for the same party that they voted for in the last election. Partisan ID is decided in the first three general elections that a person votes in. But that's another story.

**I, of course, prefer Styracosaurus.

Stuck in the Matrix

2009-01-17T16:52:00.003-06:00

In the first Matrix, a character raises a philosophical dilemma that is seemingly unique to the Matrix environment:

Tank: Here you go, buddy. Breakfast of champions.
Mouse: If you close your eyes it almost feels like you're eating runny eggs.
Apoc: Yeah, or a bowl of snot
Mouse: Do you know what it really reminds me of? Tasty Wheat. Did you ever eat Tasty Wheat?
Switch: No, but technically, neither did you.
Mouse: That's exactly my point. Exactly. Because you have to wonder now. How did the machines know what Tasty Wheat tasted like. huh?. Maybe they got it wrong. Maybe what I think Tasty Wheat tasted like actually tasted like oatmeal or tuna fish. That makes you wonder about a lot of things. You take chicken for example, maybe they couldn't figure out what to make chicken taste like, which is why chicken tastes like everything. Maybe couldn't figure out...

February 1st will mark six years of vegetarianism for me, and aside from a few brief instances (most notably, 10 days in 2005 that I spent in Mexico), I've maintained a strict meatless diet for the duration.

I have, during this time, eaten a lot of fake meat products, mostly made with soy. They have improved greatly in quality, taste, and variety over the past half decade. As far as replicating the taste of real meat, the quality varies. Hot dogs are perfect, and one assumes that this is because they aren't very "real" in the first place. Most fake chicken products are reliably tasty, and chicken-y, the taste like I remember chicken tasting, for the most part, and different brands taste like each other, so I'm pretty sure that they're right. From here, however, it's downhill. Burger quality varies widely, and soy doesn't simulate fat very well. Sausage tastes like sausage, but doesn't have anywhere near the right texture. Tofurky is delicious, and fake bacon tastes like turkey bacon, according to my mother.

But tonight Madelyn and I are going to try something new out: Match Meats Pork.

And I have no idea how pork tastes. I haven't eaten it in over 6 years, and I was never a big fan of pig when I was an omnivore. I have no memory of it. And I have no intermittent fake pork memories either, as this is the first fake pork that I've ever seen. I have no idea what pork tastes like, and I will have no idea if this stuff is accurate at all.

I guess I'll just have to trust the computer to get it right.

The Mustache of Green

2009-01-16T22:13:00.002-06:00

Tom Friedman wrote a new book. Matt Taibbi wrote a review.

Obama's People

2009-01-14T23:55:00.001-06:00

Fascinating Photo spread in the New York Times magazine. Don't miss Axelrod or Orszag.

New Blog

2009-01-08T13:27:00.000-06:00

Of Geopolitical interest: Lexi's Blog!!!!!!

Coates on Michelle Obama

2009-01-06T16:34:00.002-06:00

Everything I know about black people I learn from Ta-Nehisi Coates. His new story in the Atlantic:

When Michelle Obama told a Milwaukee campaign rally last February, "For the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country," critics derided her as another Angry Black Woman. But the only truly radical proposition put forth by Obama, born and raised in Chicago's storied South Side, is the idea of a black community fully vested in the country at large, and proud of the American dream.

Filling Rahmbo's Shoes

2009-01-06T14:37:00.001-06:00

Geoghegan would be an excellent choice. I often pretend to have read the books that he's written.

Gaza

2008-12-30T20:05:00.002-06:00

I'm starting to seriously question Israel's Right to Exist.

Afghanistan

2008-12-18T23:48:00.002-06:00

The solution to our lingering occupation of Afghistan is simple: just convince the Taliban to change their name.

All the big Al Qaeda guys are hiding in Pakistan anyway. The only reason we can't just pull out and hand the country over to the Taliban, which is an alliance of Pashtun, the country's largest ethnic group, is because of the link between their name and the 9/11 attacks. But all of the Taliban higher-ups who were involved in that are dead or captured.

So change your name to "The Pashtun Anti-Terrorist Alliance" or something, and you can have the country back.

I'm totally serious about this. In fact, I'm pretty that it is what's going to happen.

And I hate Nixon!

2008-12-17T21:34:00.000-06:00

Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse.

Adam Walsh's Killer

2008-12-17T04:01:00.002-06:00

I've been following this case for years, basically because I think John Walsh is a fucktard, and his right-wing kill-the-bastards-and-let-god-sort-it-out thoughts on crime in this country have hurt way more people than they've saved. That being said, he really did deserve to know.

EBONY

2008-12-16T04:34:00.001-06:00

I, like many of you, have been waiting with baited breath, trying to guess who Ebony Magazine will name as its person of the year.

The suspense is over.

BlagoLand

2008-12-12T04:04:00.003-06:00

I haven't really commented much on my Governor's current legal battles. The reason is simple. Larry does it better.

Archpundit is a close personal friend... why, we've even had a beer together before!

And I just want you to know that I voted for the bastard twice. I did not, however, vote for him in the primary.

And I'd do it again. What was I supposed to do, vote for the Republican?

Primaries are important. Before this little bit of fun, I was thinking Jackson for Senate, and Madigan for Governor. But Quinn is super fun, a crazy in the Kucinich mold. Let's see how that works out.

Madigan v. Jackson for Senate? I love that our top Senate candidates are both in politics because their dads are important.

Whenever the Senate primary is, I plan to vote for the farthest lefty with a chance to win. That worked out last time, when I voted for a nutty black reformer from Chicago with a funny name.

There's only one Republican in Illinois who can win statewide office now. His name is Pat Fitzgerald.

FDR

2008-12-12T03:41:00.004-06:00

It appears that there's some controversy about Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal in certain conservative quarters. Amity Shlaes is an "intellectual" pundit who likes to go on TV and tell people that the New Deal didn't solve the great depression. George Will, despite being smacked around by Paul Krugman, gives movement and mainstream authenticity to her claims on Sunday mornings, on George Snuffleupagus's show. We need a simple response to this ludicrous claims that treats them with the seriousness that they deserve.

At the same time, we're actually having trouble figuring out "make work" projects for the new stimulus package. Since federal, state, and local agencies weren't anticipating the need or (political) ability to fund great works, we don't actually have a lot of sensible projects that are ready to go right now. They will come in time, as this recession will take years to work itself out, but we need ideas of things to do now.

Let me make a simple observation to deal with both issues: There's room on Mt. Rushmore for another face.

Best. Ad. Evar.

2008-12-09T15:49:00.002-06:00

I found this while surfing around and reading coverage of Blago. If companies are going to advertise on political blogs, this is by far the best way to do it.

Did you know?

2008-12-09T14:45:00.001-06:00

That the state of Illinois has established, with federal funding, a retirement home for our former Governors?

I love Andy Samberg

2008-12-07T01:39:00.001-06:00

I just watched Saturday Night Live... and I jizzed in my pants.

Taibbi on the election

2008-12-02T02:04:00.001-06:00

Matt Taibbi's latest article: Requiem for a Maverick

NaNoWriMo Victory

2008-12-01T00:12:00.002-06:00

As you can now see on the right, I completed NaNoWriMo in the nick of time. I'm not actually finished with the novel at 50,000, and expect it to creep up a few thousand more words before I'm done with the first draft. Then I have a list of minor changes to make to it already, so I anticipate the first draft being finished sometime later this week.

After that, there are a few people who have offered to read and offer criticism, so they'll find a copy of it in their inboxes. I'm going to stick it in the proverbial drawer, and not worry about it for the next month and a half, as I finish applying to Law Schools. After that messy business is finished, I'll pull the thing back out and figure out what I want to do with it.

And, in case you were wondering, yes, I do feel like a viking.

Widgets

2008-11-21T13:40:00.003-06:00

First things first, if you're reading this blog through an RSS feed, such as Google Reader (which is how I read most blogs), you miss two elements to this blog. The first is that I infrequently change the tagline at the top, just to see if people are paying attention, and the second are the widgets to the right of the main posts. If you're reading me through something else, then you'll need to click on over to the actual site to see what I'm talking about.

I have added two widgets to the blog. The first is the NaNoWriMo widget. I like this one because it tells you not only my daily progress, but it also calculates how much further I have to go. If you look over there, the first couple of lines are solid red. I didn't write much before, during, and right after the election, and the solid red lines are days when I didn't write at all. The length of the line is an approximation of how much I should have been writing, in order to keep pace to meet 50,000 words. Note how it lengthens. The Green/Red lines are when I did write, but not up to the pace that I should have. The Gray/Green lines are when I went beyond what I needed for a steady pace to win. In order to make up for my slow start, I've needed to have a few 3,000 word days. This has helped me catch up. Note how the gray portion recedes every time I beat the daily goal. And, finally the dark gray lines at the bottom are the future. Who knows what the future holds?

I don't, but I'm hoping for dinosaurs.

Moving right along down the widget lane, there's an ad. I basically put that there for testing purposes. Nobody clicks it. Don't worry about it.

Next up are my shared items! Most blogs have a blogroll, a list of blogs that people read daily. I think it's better to just link to the items in other blogs that I find interesting. This also keeps this blog from turning into a "Hey, look at this!" linkfest.

And finally, my second new widget, the follower feature. If you've ever felt a burning desire to have me e-mailed to you, or get frustrated when you check the blog daily and there's no new content, this is the place for you. Actually, I'd be tickled pink if people would sign up to follow me. It would be, like, validation and shit. It's google, so if you've got a gmail account, you're already registered, so what's to lose? Other than admitting to other people that you read my blog, that is...

And then archives and about me, blah blah blah.

And now, back to the novel-writing salt mines...

Nom Nom Nom Nom

2008-11-21T12:50:00.003-06:00

You know, a year ago I would've been pretty entertained by a gigantic bank failure or two. But now that those are so common, it's becoming passe.

But you know what I'm really starting to get entertained by? Country failures.

Dear Switzerland, I suggest you place your head in between your legs and kiss your ass goodbye.

The Netherlands and Denmark look like they've got pretty bad situations too, but both of those countries are EU members, so Nicholas "St. Nick" Sarkozy's got their back.

Smells Like Socialism

2008-11-20T19:55:00.003-06:00

A progressive income tax, despite what the McCain campaign liked to claim, is not socialism.

But the government owning facilities, paying doctors, and coordinating the health care of individuals is, like, the definition of socialized medicine.

I present to you, Marxist Hero Bobby Jindal, Republican Governor of Louisiana.

You can do that?

2008-11-20T18:12:00.000-06:00

In the future, I will be casting my votes for the Lizard People.

Research

2008-11-20T00:29:00.002-06:00

In addittion to writing, I'm also doing a lot of research these days in order to make sure that my book about TERRORISM OMG is accurate. My Greatest find thus far.

I once saw Father Phillip Berrigan speak at SLU. He was giving a talk and on one side of him was an American Flag, and on the other side was a Vatican Flag. He got up to the podium and said "Ahh, just like Jesus, hung between two theives."

GOP CIVIL WAR WATCH

2008-11-17T14:12:00.003-06:00

Huckabee's new book should apparently be subtitled "Fuck Mitt Romney".

Huckabee's a smart guy. Not only is his brand of Conservativism the best hope the GOP has for becoming a national party again, but he's also smart enough to correctly identify the 2012 front runner.

This blog would like to on record as saying that it doesn't really matter who the GOP nominates in 2012, the results of that election will be entirely determined by how well the economy is doing, which will be determined by how effective Obama's policies are.

And the fact that it won't matter at all who they pick is what makes the GOP Civil War even more entertaining.

Ancient Jokes

2008-11-14T21:10:00.000-06:00

Ancient Greek Joke Book.

It's about 700 years older than the thing at the link, but I still think Aristophanes is one of the funniest writers I've ever read. If I recall correctly the first part of The Clouds is full of Socrates making fart jokes.

Buffalo Commons

2008-11-13T16:45:00.001-06:00

I heartily endorse this idea... and it's from a libertarian!

Obama Nerd Watch

2008-11-12T23:56:00.000-06:00

The People have a RIGHT TO KNOW.

Next July

2008-11-12T11:35:00.000-06:00

Our future socialist dystopia.

Two rigid ideological parties... YES!

2008-11-11T10:00:00.003-06:00

Way back in 2005 I had a class on political parties and interest groups. One of the key points the professor tried to drive home was that the United States didn't really have National Parties, but rather 50 state parties and a national fundraising arm for the Presidential race every four years. I pointed out two things: the first is that the parties have becoming increasingly ideologically aligned, and that picking Howard Dean as DNC chief (instead of some fundraising flunky) meant that the Democratic party meant to become a national party. My Prof. allowed for the possibility that I was correct, except that there were still some outliers in congress, and that there wasn't an equivelent "celebrity" leader in charge of the RNC. I argued "wait and see" about the congress, and pointed out that since Bush was President, he was leader of the party, so the RNC didn't need a "leader" leader.

Well, following 2006, the most liberal Republican is more conservative than the most conservative Democrat in congress. Republicans elected from New York are more conservative than Democrats elected from North Carolina. That's an ideologically coherent national party system, my friends.

And now that Obama's won the Presidency, he's replacing Dean with one of his own guys. And it looks like Newt Gingrich wants to be RNC Chairman. Newt being RNC Chair would prove my quasi-Marxist theory of partisan evolution true.

America is a big country, and we've long had a patchwork party system based on regional differences, but fifty years after the advent of mass media, we've finally cohered into a sensible two-party system. This is bad for political reporters, who like interesting stories about Mavericks crossing party lines. And it's bad for wanna-be philosophes who are oh so concerned that the parties don't line up with their particular esoteric political philosophies. But it's great for average voters, who don't need to really know anything about particular candidates before casting their votes.

Now I just need to start a campaign to bring back straight ticket voting...

NANOWRIMO

2008-11-11T01:43:00.001-06:00

I got a late start because of the election, but in the words of Samuel L. Jackson, I continue to kick ass.

Secretary of State

2008-11-10T12:57:00.002-06:00

There's chatter out there about who President-Elect Barack Hussein Obama might choose as his Secretary of State. While this blog officially supports Bill "America's Bestest Diplomat Evar" Richardson (and we strenuously object to Dick "I like to bomb things" Holbrooke), the two names I find interesting are Hillary Clinton and John Kerry.

Some commentaries during the primary season compared the Clinton/Obama race to the Seward/Lincoln competition in 1860. William H. Seward was thought to be a lock on the Republican nomination in 1860, but Lincoln out maneuvered him for the nomination. After the convention, Seward agreed to campaign for Lincoln, and after the election, Lincoln chose him to be Secretary of State.

What's been missed is that there's a precedent for Kerry too. In 1912, Woodrow Wilson chose the former nominee of the party, William Jennings Bryan, to be his Secretary of State.

All I'm saying is, if Black Lincoln picks Lady Seward, the Republicans are running a General in 2012.

2012

2008-11-09T11:54:00.002-06:00

Last night there was some irresponsible speculation on 2012. I know, I know. I think I brought up the topic of the GOP Civil War, the best new show since Heroes, and that eventually led us down the sundry path to 2012.

All the usual names were tossed out: Palin, Jindal, Huckabee, Charlie "Three Dollar Bill" Crist, RomneyBot™, and The Newt, along with a few lesser known Governors. Interestingly, no Senators were mentioned, probably because the GOP's Senators are either too old, certifiably insane, or Pro-Choice. Other Matt brought up the possibility of a General, and despite this, I think President Obama is going to keep Petraeus employed until 2012, at least.

But now I'm thinking Obama has to run against a General. Black Lincoln needs his McClellan! But who will it be?

Oregon goes for the Dems!

2008-11-05T20:46:00.002-06:00

Jeff Merkley will be the next U.S. Senator from Oregon, and he will be one of the most five liberal Senators we have.

He almost lost. We could have won this seat easily if Merkley had run a bit more of a conservative campaign. Or if the fucking Greens hadn't gotten 5% of the vote.

How Ralph Nader Moves The Democrats Right

2008-11-05T15:33:00.007-06:00

Below I pointed out how Naderism siphons voters off from the left and makes Democrats lose, and how this in turn makes progressive policy harder to accomplish. For example, Nader's "Medicare For All", which I and all other progressives agree would have an actual chance if there were 60 votes in the House. As it is, we probably won't be able to enact it. This is the fruit of Naderism.

But not only does Naderism hurt progressive policy options, it actually moves the Democratic Party to the right.

This, or something like it, is roughly what the ideological make-up of American voters and congresscritters:

This isn't exact, but let's say the median voter is the red line here. That means in a normal election between two candidates, a candidate must get all the voters up to the red line.:

Now, in an election where progressive voters are convinced to take Naderism seriously the median voter shifts, to the blue line here. Every left-leaning voter that is convinced to abandon the Democratic Party is a vote the Democrats have to make up. Nader's response would be that the Democrats should just move left — but it's much easier to make up the lost votes by moving 1% to the right rather than moving the 10% left needed to win back the Naderites.

If I were a Libertarian, whose policy preferences have been abandoned by both parties to a significant degree, I'd engage in tactical voting to encourage gridlock. But I can understand the case for principled Libertarian votes. Naderism isn't like that at all. The Naderite or Green or Socialist critique of the Democratic Party is that the party isn't pure enough. They all fit together on a leftist spectrum, the Democrats are just interested in winning elections, so they have to be more conservative than fringe candidates. The harsh consequence of Naderism, however, is that it has the opposite result of its supposed goals.

If you want better liberals, compete in Democratic Primaries. When it comes to the general election, Naderism is generally a futile gesture, except when it succeeds, because then it's actively destructive to its own goals.

Future'd

2008-11-05T13:15:00.001-06:00

I watched the returns on MSNBC last night, so I missed the most awesome development of the Election Campaign.

Hologram Technology is fucking here.

Third Party Suck

2008-11-05T11:38:00.003-06:00

It didn't matter on the topline this year, but in the four outstanding Senate races, the third party vote is larger than the difference between the two candidates.

In other words (MARC ERIKSEN THIS MEANS YOU), third parties may have prevented the Democratic party from having the majority it needs for super liberal reform. In other words, the practical consequence of Naderism is to hold the progressive movement back. Or, in still other words, progressives who vote and argue for third parties are just helping the Republicans.

But, if you've been paying attention, that's old news.

SRSLY

2008-11-05T11:28:00.002-06:00

Advice to Election officials: Next time start counting the absentee ballots as they come in, asshats.

Apparently Georgia didn't count any of its early votes, you know, early.

And what the fuck is Oregon's problem, anyway?

The election was yesterday, I should know how many Senators we have now.

Newspapers

2008-11-05T09:08:00.000-06:00

Today's front pages.

Barack Hussein Obama

2008-11-05T08:31:00.002-06:00

If Presidents renamed themselves after taking office like Popes do, I'm pretty sure Obama would be Abraham Lincoln II.

Open Letter #2

2008-11-04T21:03:00.001-06:00

Dear Bryan,

You owe me $20. Cash or beer, delivered in front of as many mutual friends as possible.

<3

Open Letter #1

2008-11-04T21:01:00.001-06:00

Dear Uncle Jim,

You owe me $20. Cash or beer, delivered in front of as many family members as possible.

kthzbai

Election Day

2008-11-04T16:56:00.000-06:00

ZOMG JUST MAKE IT STOP. So tired. Want it all to end.

ZOMG LULZ

2008-11-03T11:16:00.001-06:00

Howard's other ride is your mom.

I can't WAIT for the Election Night interview with Dean...

New Toy!

2008-11-03T10:24:00.000-06:00

I am now the proud owner of a 4"x3" stamp of Obama's face.

If you come to Cherokee now I can put a stamp of Obama's face on YOUR FACE! Tell your friends...

4%

2008-11-03T09:54:00.002-06:00

My NaNoWriMo.

I'm going to write a novel in November. My pace will pick up after the election. Blogging will slack.

Add me as a buddy if you're doing it. I work better with competition.

Voter Targetting?

2008-10-31T12:47:00.000-05:00

I just got robo-called by the RNC... at the Obama Office.

A suggestion for Conservatives

2008-10-31T10:04:00.001-05:00

I think the path back to power for the Republicans looks a little like this.

Election Haiku

2008-10-29T14:03:00.000-05:00

From Slate's Bill Smee's:

McCain picked Palin.
Already 72.
Might die in office.

Cry, baby, cry

2008-10-29T11:05:00.002-05:00

Charles meets Barack

Barkley for Governor

2008-10-28T11:31:00.001-05:00

Sir Charles is planning on running for Governor of Alabama in 2014.

Forty-five years ago, this was the Governor of Alabama.

What a country.

Early Voting

2008-10-28T10:37:00.002-05:00

Since my broadcast area is generally restricted to the St. Louis Metro area, you all should know that you can vote early every day up until the election.

People in St. Clair County go to the Belleville Courthouse downtown. People in St. Louis should go to 300 N. Tucker street and vote at the board of elections.

After you've voted, you can come volunteer at the Obama office on Election Day. It'll be super fun.

Law School

2008-10-28T10:23:00.001-05:00

I'm starting to get e-mails from Law Schools offering me fee waivers if I'll apply to their schools. I figure that's a good sign.

How we begin our day

2008-10-27T09:10:00.001-05:00

Every day until Nov. 4th.

Odd Polling

2008-10-24T17:35:00.002-05:00

I'm kind of confused by why Obama's lead in the polls continues to grow. The race ought to be constricting as we close, rather than widening. Hell, in some polls I've even seen McCain losing ground.

Rather than any silly explanations that people might have (laying the credit at Colin Powell's feet, for example), let me suggest it's just the likely voter model changing. I've sort of suspected that pollsters have been dramatically understating how many of Obama's voters are actually going to vote. Now that early voting is happening the flaws in most polling models are beginning to show, as people they have as "not likely" have, in fact, already voted. As pollsters are forced to include the already voted in their polls, the demographics of the electorate change, and McCain loses a few points.

Election Night Questions #3

2008-10-24T11:48:00.003-05:00

What happens in Texas?

Texas is a majority minority state (i.e. no demographic group has over 50% of the population of the state), but in the past a clear majority of the state's voters (66% in 2004) have been white, and they vote very Republican.

Most people assume that Texas is safe for McCain and that Sen. John Cornyn will win re-election, because the state has been so Republican in the past. I'm not sure, particularly because the Hispanic vote has shifted so dramatically towards the Democrats in the past four years (Bush tied Kerry amongst Hispanics in Texas).

I'm virtually alone in this, but I think the Road to 60 goes through Noriega.

And then, of course, there's also the matter of the state's electoral votes. While Texas isn't a swing state, I think it's the next red state after Indiana to go blue.

Casting Call

2008-10-23T14:02:00.003-05:00

Seeing this made me realize that Bill Murray would play a perfect John McCain in the inevitable 2008 election movie.

Obama and Will Smith already have an understanding between themselves. I don't think anybody can argue with Kevin Spacey as Mike Huckabee or Tina Fey as Sarah Palin. And Samuel L. Jackson could lend the necessary GOD DAMN AMERICA gravitas to Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

I have a hard time thinking of who to cast for Bill and Hillary, since John Travolta and Emma Thompson are stuck in my head from Primary Colors, maybe someone else has a better idea.

So, in the spirit of W., who do you guys think should play...

Bill and Hillary Clinton?
Mitt Romney?
John Edwards?
David Axelrod?
David Plouffe?
Howard "Sweater" Wolfson?
Tucker Barnes?

...feel free to add your own.

Election Day Questions #2

2008-10-23T10:43:00.002-05:00

Will McCain break 30% in Illinois?

Current polling has it in the low 30s. Will the race a foregone conclusion, I can certainly see many McCain voters just staying home. On the other hand, Obama's political base in Chicago is certain to get out to vote for the hometown kid. So Obama might actually be able to double McCain's vote total in the Land of Lincoln.

You know, like he did with Keyes.