Skip to main content

View Diary: 1980 Redux (193 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Spot on (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DHinMI, ljb, skywaker9, LNK, MadGeorgiaDem

    DH's 1932 analysis was astute as well -- but I've believed for a while that this will shape up like 1980 in reverse.  We might not have to wait for the debates, though.  The conventions will bring wavering Democrats home, and go a long way toward showing indies that Obama is a safe choice.

    On a related note:  geez, now do all the hyperventilaters understand what Obama meant when he compared himself to Reagan?  Do you get it?  He was talking about realignments and public mood, not saying he wanted to slash social spending and grow the debt.  Got it now?  

    If there really were a radical black Muslim country-club elitist in the race, I'd probably vote for him just for novelty's sake.

    by cardinal on Sun Aug 03, 2008 at 12:14:39 PM PDT

    •  Interesting thing about 1980 (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DemFromCT, cardinal, MadGeorgiaDem, ancblu

      Is that 15 states were decided by less than 5%, Carter only won 3 of those.  Therefore the Evs were a little more skewed than they might have been otherwise.

      "Polls are like crack, political activists know they're bad for them but they read them anyways."-Unknown

      by skywaker9 on Sun Aug 03, 2008 at 12:16:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  no, no, reagan is evil (6+ / 0-)

      you can't even say his name or something bad will happen.

      And Obama should be up by 115%.

      Now here's an interesting post about margins in presidential elections.

      "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

      by Greg Dworkin on Sun Aug 03, 2008 at 12:18:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  "There you go again" (0+ / 0-)

      is a line that only becomes devastatingly effective when it follows upon months of painting your opponent as clueless, inept, and handwringing. Carter had already been defined that way in most voters' eyes.

      McCain is an especially weak candidate: he's ignorant (perhaps even more ignorant than Bush), thin-skinned, and bad-tempered, and his "program" is outright incoherent and completely oblivious to what Americans are really feeling. It should be possible to humiliate him and provoke him into going scarily postal-- if we start today and seize the opportunity provided by the jealous pique he's taken at Obama's "presumptous" world tour.

      The Obama campaign should take the offensive; never let itself get thrown on the defensive and forced to put out small smear blazes; hammer McCain every day on his incoherent political program and the low road he's taking in his advertising; and use surrogates (not Obama himself) to mock McCain and show him for a fool. Then Obama can step up and crush him in the first debate. The media will climb aboard because the Obama campaign will be giving them political high drama, which is all they care about.

      The worst way to handle McCain, though, is to do what Gore and Kerrey did-- cede all the political dramaturgy to the Republican noise machine and let them exclusively feed the media beast with daily heapin' helpin's of rancid Republican red meat. The media was happy to oblige Bush and Rove and reinforce the Rovian memes while ignoring the Democrats' message. This is America, which means-- unfortunately-- that you have to Feed the Beast.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (130)
  • Community (56)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (30)
  • Environment (26)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Rescued (18)
  • Media (18)
  • Bernie Sanders (17)
  • Labor (17)
  • Science (17)
  • Education (17)
  • Elections (17)
  • Law (16)
  • GOP (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • United States (14)
  • Marriage Equality (14)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site