Code Blue! Paging Dr. Dean, Stat.

...but I hope they won't be as hasty with it as they were after 2000. It was their hurried misconception that the election was stolen that led to this mess.

I hope cooler heads will prevail this time around!

The one problem I see is that one side is going to be extremely disappointed and if it's the side with the most young and first time voters... that will be a huge problem!

by that measure it would be better for the Dems if Obama wins because Clinton supporters tend to be more solid and dependable voters, while it's not clear if his young and first-time supporters would stick around for the general. Especially after the heated primary.

I know a lot of you guys didn't have McCain as your first choice but it's got to be nice to see him turn from losing to both Dem candidates (or at least Obama) to beating them both in polls over the last month. Lots of time before the election but the Dems don't look nearly as strong as they did back in February.

Somewhat surprisingly (to me) Intrade doesn't agree with the above; McCain for President has only gone from 35% to 40% since Feb 1 to today (in a fairly even progression).

I saw Erick had a post up at Redstate this morning saying Obama would be easier to beat than Hillary -- is that the new thinking among Republicans? Is the idea that rooting for Hillary is basically rooting for injuries since she doesn't have much of a chance at the nomination, or are there still large groups of conservatives who view her as easier to defeat because she'd energize the base? Just curious...

Visit Swords Crossed for bipartisan debate

...that either would be beatable by McCain but you're correct conservatives are starting to see (after the wright deal and other rookie type mistakes) that the shine is staring to dim on Obama and could be vulnerable.

All in all, Republicans (and more and more conservatives) are coming to the realization that McCain might just be the best candidate to run this November. Not that conservatives view him as their perfect candidate but as someone who can win in this climate!

I don't have a horse in the "who would be easier for McCain to beat" debate, but had I to chose I continue to think Hillary would be easier to beat in spite of (IMO) Obama's clear lack of readiness for anything resembling prime time.

I think it's diffucult for a septegenarian with nearly 3-deacdes in the Senate and a fractured base to beat "HOPE!! HOPE!! HOPE!!" - but Obama's recent, erm, unsteadiness may drive some indies back toward McCain. I think Maverick Voters^TM (myself included) are now equally terrified by the two Dems which is likely to keep Maverick Voting to a minimum except in regions (like New England) where it doesn't matter.

I think McCain vs. Hillary results in the lowest turn-out election in recent history. It will be a spectacularly unpleasant campaign, but one whereby I think Hillary suffers greatly from the bruising primary.

Intrade could, however, be reflecting the fact that every time McPain seems to start to solidify his base behind him he goes and says a whole bunch of crap that drives more people back toward my direction (skipping the top, voting the undercard).

Then again, you didn't really ask me - did you???

Best -

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

That many places - RedState included - are now through November 4 going to be in full-blown "RAH!! RAH!! Johnny MAC!!" mode. So you might just want to take such pronouncements from the likes of Erick and company vis-a-vis Obama with so many grains of salt.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

I probably wouldn't bother to ask about the election on RedState.

Visit Swords Crossed for bipartisan debate

A lot has been made over the fact that McCain isn't comparing to Obama and Hillary in terms of fundraising. Well let me say this...he doesn't have to. He's grabbing headlines on his choosing. He knows the nature of the beast (that being the media) they are circling the Democrats right now ready to move in for the kill. McCain is off playing commander-in-chief, traveling around the country in friendly places having productive chit chats. He doesn't need the kind of money they do. The kind of money that is required to utterly destroy someone.

The Partisan Report,
www.partisanreport.com

To a degree or in a way that annoyed many conservatives, as I understand!

I think that's what kept his candidacy alive when he basically went broke last year -- he used the press to keep himself in the news, to essentially get free advertising for his campaign.

Now like you say he gets to look above-the-fray and can lay the groundwork for his general election effort while Obama and Hillary damage each other.

Visit Swords Crossed for bipartisan debate

No offense indended brendan - but this fine electoral quagmire in which the Democrats find themselves is the logical end result of their entire political philosophy. In other words, that they've re-created the spectacularly dysfunctional Italian electoral system as a reaction to their feeling unfarily treated by the SCOTUS in 2000 is a feature and not a bug of their ideological underpinnings, such as that there are no "losers", only "winners" and that all must be treated "fairly" - whatever that means.

Sorry man - it's their own petard, and I hope they continue to utilize it as designed.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

on your own blog for ripping Democrats =)

The Clinton camp has done a good job of framing the current mess with Florida as similar to the 2000 situation, with Obama in the role of... well, I want to say in the role of Bush, but perhaps I should say in the role of the Dem caricature of Bush.

That resentment over the way 2000 is still there under the surface for a lot of liberal voters, despite some of the recounts showing Bush would have won regardless under many scenarios.

I'm not sure I like the mostly winner-take-all Republican primary system better... this harks back to the electoral college debate in some ways. In my own perfect world the Dem primaries would have no superdelegates and each state would divide up 75% of their delegates proportionally and give the other 25% to the overall winner.

Visit Swords Crossed for bipartisan debate

You don't have to tell me about the "lingering resentment" over 2000 - I live in the Peoples' Republic of MA, remember? I have to deal almost daily with people who continue to whine about 2000 as if 2004 never happened and it's not under any surfaces - it's right out there on their sleeves!

Were I in the ludicrous position of advising the Democrats, I would suggest schwacking the superdelegates (a horrifically "undemocratic" part of the equation, no?), allocate 25% of all delegates proportionately (to anyone getting, say, 20% or more of the vote), allocate 25% based on voting in the congressional district, and the remaining 50% are winner-take-all. That means for small states I essentially flip your percentages (75% to the winner, 25% proportionately) - but then again I've never been a particularly big believer in this whole "democracy" thing!

Cheers -

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

Visit Swords Crossed for bipartisan debate