Skip to main content

I put most of this as a comment elsewhere, but I'm so pissed off about our chest-thumping leader that I'm going to make it its own diary as well.

Markos's "The Most Annonying Liberal Freakouts of 2012" is among the most annoying things that he's written in 2012 -- because it shows that, in making a false equivalence between what some of us did after the first debate, he still fails to understands both the sliminess of what CNN did with its "Snap Poll" coverage and the serious peril that the President's campaign was in after Oct. 4.

The fact that that VP Biden and President Obama both did solid jobs in the three subsequent debates and that the Democratic ticket ended up almost sweeping the swing states is wonderful, but immaterial to the judgment that was to be made in the wake of that debate.  It's like saying that because you got drunk and drove 80 on the highway and skidded out but you didn't hit anything and made it home safely everything was OK.  You don't judge the rightness of actions solely by their consequences.

What CNN did was terrible and there a good chance that but for the quality of our candidates it could have left us in mourning today.  So let's go to the replay on "liberal unskewing" on October 4, of which I think that my diary (building on someone else's) was the most-read example.

First of all, there was a legitimate criticism to be made against my diary and the preceding one by "TheSilverMonkey." That poster had reacted to the explanation of the data accompanying the snap poll by noting that it had apparently polled only older whites from the South.  It turned out that this wasn't true -- CNN/ORC had just made a bizarre and to my mind indefensible decision about how to present the breakdown of its data -- but it led me and others to take a closer look at the internal analysis, which I think was all to the good.

Still, that wasn't Markos's problem with the pair of diaries.  His position was that Obama had sucked and that we shouldn't complain about the data showing that Romney had beaten Obama by a margin of 69 to 25 -- which is the worst beating ever recorded in Presidential debates (if you took this as actually being representative of the public.)  Criticizing the poll was "unskewing" -- and we didn't want to be like the conservative unskewers (unskewerers?), so he grabbed the opportunity to criticize those lefties who slammed the methodology of the study.

In other words, he was engaged in (more or less) hippie-punching and false equivalency.

This wouldn't be a problem if he had been right -- but he wasn't.  And he also overlooked that, by coming out so quickly after the debate and by misleading readers and viewers into thinking that this was a poll of the general population's reaction to the debate, the CNN poll had an enormously outsized effect on then-unformed public reaction to the Presidential first debate -- at which, incidentally, I admit that Obama underperformed, but not as bad as have many others.

Why is this?  Simple sociology.  When presented with a stimulus to evaluate, such as a debate performance, people look for normative information -- "what do other people think?"  In this case, that normative information was overwhelming -- so much so as to convince anyone who called it the other way that they must be missing something.  That snowball effect, beyond simply the debate itself, led to the overwhelmingly negative reaction to Obama's performance -- which, in my opinion, was weak because he hadn't expected Romney to shake the Etch-a-Sketch right at that moment and because he wrongly figured that, if Romney did something that brazen, the press would kick his teeth in.

My concern from the moment I looked at the data and saw how slanted the sample was on several variables.  If it wasn't ALL older white Southerners, it was more so than it should have been -- and, most critically, we had no idea from where the initial sample was taken.

To the best of my knowledge, we still don't know.  I still expect that we're going to find out that the panel used to get reactions to all four debates -- eventually admitted to be 8% more Republican than most other contemporaneous samples -- was initially selected from a universe of cable news viewers, not "all voters."  And, due to additional bias creates from people dropping out of a panel study -- the same people, from whatever population they came from, were surveyed prior to any debate and then after each one) -- the bias in the sample may well have become worse over time.

On to the comment I left in reply to Markos:

Hello, Markos:

My concern -- and I think I'm the only one you called out in comments after the first debate, though I could be wrong -- was that CNN/ORC was intentionally using a strained poll to push a narrative that Romney had outpeformed Obama far more than he had.  I stand by that 100%.

After I and the [other] diary's author and others blew up in fury at the CNN/ORC poll -- despite your snottiness towards us -- and after I started a pretty well-read Facebook page going after them and other people took their own actions that you deride as "unskewing," CNN finally noted (in a small print note on the technical details page of their poll) that Party ID in the sample they were using was highly discrepant from the ones in their other contemporaneous polls.

In other words, IT WAS SKEWED and they weren't telling to public that.  But by the time that that was admitted, the CNN/ORC's role in helping to augment the negative reaction to the President's first debate had been completed.  It was the right early bump in the trajectory at the right time.

But if you're still so annoyed at the "liberal freakout" to the CNN/ORC poll, which was represented to the public in headlines and stories simply as a sample of "voters who had watched the debate" (a phrase that I'm paraphrasing from memory) maybe you can answer this question:

Of what initial universe of respondents was that poll supposed to be a representative sample?
If you can't answer that question -- and I don't think that you can without looking it up and maybe initiating a phone call or two -- then you have got no fucking business criticizing anyone else, because you're the one who didn't get it -- and somehow you still don't seem to get how damaging that single, first-appearing, mendacious poll was to the campaign.

(Yes, Biden and Obama then salvaged things with three strong subsequent debate performances.  But what if they hadn't?)

If you're sitting here smugly in the wake of Obama's election victory and assuring yourself that it couldn't ultimately have been otherwise, you're fooling yourself.  No, that one debate didn't push Obama underwater, especially in swing states -- but that doesn't mean that a second generally-agreed-to-be-bad performance couldn't have or that two more such performances wouldn't have.  And the trigger for that would not have been so much the debate itself as the dramatically, unbelievably, slanted CNN/ORC poll -- of a sample initially selected from a universe of respondents the identity of which we still don't know.

The right thing to do at that moment, when it became clear that CNN/ORC's poll was highly misleading -- and any trained survey researcher should have been able to perceive that something was off from the data itself -- was to lunge towards them with both hands throttling their neck and a thumb in each eye.  (In this metaphor, one has four arms.)  Refutation had to be quick and powerful and sure, before opinion coalesced in a way that put us at a disadvantage.

And do you know who I learned that from?  I learned it from Markos Moulitsas -- at his best.  That is not, obviously, where he was when he wrote the diary he published today.

5:38 PM PT: I think that it's only fair to point out that this post today is an example of Markos at close to his best.  He's a great analyst when he's not trying to be snotty.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  If I'm presenting a "conspiracy theory," then (22+ / 0-)

    I'm supposed to have evidence.  Well, if this is such a theory -- at least I do.

    I'm proud to have kicked the CNN/ORC poll so hard and so quickly, in concert with others, that it eventually had to post a disclaimer.  I wish that Markos hadn't stood against that effort so that he could distinguish himself from the "unskewers" -- because the poll was skewed, and given its rapidity and prominence was particularly damaging, and it had to be vigorously called out and opposed.

    Je ne regrette rien.

    Pro-Occupy Democratic Candidate for California State Senate, District 29 & Occupy OC Civic Liaison.

    "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky

    by Seneca Doane on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 04:48:28 PM PST

    •  +4/Rec'd. Let's not revise history (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Seneca Doane, Joieau, Just Bob, annieli

      retroactively

      Happy little moron, Lucky little man.
      I wish I was a moron, MY GOD, Perhaps I am!
      —Spike Milligan

      by polecat on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:05:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Huh. I thought Obama did fine (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      frankzappatista, Seneca Doane, crose

      in the first debate, other than my perpetual impatience with his 'ums' and 'ers'. Romney looked like a bully, and while his arguments had some meat, Obama countered them effectively. The videos of the physical demeanor may live forever in internet hell, but if you read the transcript/hear the audio it's easy enough to see who really won.

      Remember, this was Benghazi Night. Any impressions of preoccupation are excused. Retroactively...

    •  Go back and read ALL the diaries ... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      frankzappatista, Wisdumb

      posted in the first 48 hours after the first debate.  (Perhaps you were busy and missed them at the time?)  My memory is that about 95% of them agreed that Obama's performance was absolutely horrible, and most were terrified that the election was lost as a result.

      I was stunned ... STUNNED ... that Kossacks, of all people, were saying the things they were as I fully expected to instead find mostly spin.

      Attacking Markos is a strange thing to be doing today.

      "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

      by Neuroptimalian on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:48:11 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Aw let's not fight (7+ / 0-)

    I think you're both wrong about the debate.  But jeesh.  

    When truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

    by Sun dog on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 04:54:14 PM PST

  •  Why all the fuss? Obama F'ed the first debate (8+ / 0-)

    and still kicked Romney's ass. I don't understand the issue here. I love the fact that Obama had the worst debate performance of all time and still killed Romney. It goes to show that he can ace the test even after lighting one up in the back of the class.

    Have you googled Romney today?

    by fou on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 04:55:09 PM PST

    •  I think the point is (6+ / 0-)

      that Obama didn't actually have the worst debate performance of all time but that a crooked media and an all too cooperative left drove that narrative for all it was worth to make it appear like the worst debate ever.  

      The fact is that candidates have sucked so much more than that and not been punished for it in the polls, the press or by their own supporters.  Obama wasn't the one lying his ass off and changing half his positions and setting himself up for being skewered in the next two debates and losing the election.  That was Mitt Romney.  

      When truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

      by Sun dog on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 04:59:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Politics is perception. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sviscusi, doroma

        If Obama's performance didn't win the narrative, he fucked up. Pure and simple. You can't claim that the same media was crooked the first time, but not the second and the third.

        In retrospect, I love that he fucked up. Of course it would have been horrible had we lost, but we didn't. I don't know, I enjoyed his arrogance and contempt for Romney, Lehrer and the whole stupid clown show.

        Have you googled Romney today?

        by fou on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:07:59 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  For God's sake, fou! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Just Bob

          What do you think the same CNN/ORC poll said, compared to other polls, after the second and third debates?  It was still massively biased against Obama compared to other polls -- it was just drowned out by other polls that weren't and people's own untainted perceptions.  It was so biased that they had to note it on their technical report page -- in small print that few would see.

          Pro-Occupy Democratic Candidate for California State Senate, District 29 & Occupy OC Civic Liaison.

          "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky

          by Seneca Doane on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:17:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't care. He won. n/t (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            pHunbalanced

            Have you googled Romney today?

            by fou on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:20:15 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I care (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              stellaluna, Just Bob, DeadHead, Roger Fox

              There will be other elections -- and CNN will try to do the same damn thing.

              Pro-Occupy Democratic Candidate for California State Senate, District 29 & Occupy OC Civic Liaison.

              "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky

              by Seneca Doane on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:21:07 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  So what. Let them. By now you should know (0+ / 0-)

                that CNN saw a tie whenever Obama was ahead by 5, and Romney with major momentum when a poll showed Obama +1.   They took major lumps from conservatives when they were more on the liberal side (during the Clinton years) and have been trying to overcompensate into the other direction ever since.  

                In addition to their overcompensation and their general "need" to create a horserace for ratings and ad Dollars, there is also a "real" substantive movement to the right to attract conservative viewers in CNN land, as seen via  several right-wing analyst hires (including right-wing nutjob Erick Erickson.)

                But, BUT:

                1. Why would what CNN does or doesn't do (including publishing a snap poll that included more Republicans than Democrats) be the topic of an investigative diary the day after?   Who cares?  FoxNews had Karl Rove performing cartwheels and Frank Luntz showing a focus group that claimed that the Kenyan-Indonesian-Socialist-Nazi-Atheist-Muslim has a lazy eye and his pocket teleprompter ran out of batteries.   SO WHAT?   Move on.  Work on shaping the next news cycle to change the narrative.  Don't worry about what a network obviously interested in creating a horse race does or doesn't do.  Sure, a comment here and there about how CNN has gone to the dogs, but a whole whiny diary?

                2.  And now you are doubling down with another installation of a whine fest?  Why?  WHY?   This diary is clearly a vanity.  The comment and attack on kos should have been in the form of a simple comment in the article this diary decries.   That would have been the proper way, as that would have opened a dialogue within the thread you have a problem with, with the OP of that thread (kos) then being asked for a response.   Calling him out with a vanity diary is childish, serves no purpose other than the selfish need to express outrage at what in the end is a simple disagreement.

                 

          •  Yeah I thought the 3rd debate was like Ali (0+ / 0-)

            later in his career, he would rope a dope until the last round then do his Ali Shuffle.... dance like a butterfly and sting like a bee.

            When Bob said to Romney, "everyone likes teachers" it was like a ref stopping the fight and hugging the loser so they wont get hurt. Romney was punch drunk but didnt know it. Obama was like Ali, the champ and pretty.

            To me Obama utterly dominated Romney in the 3rd debate, unmatched by Romneys win in the first debate.

            FDR 9-23-33, "If we cannot do this one way, we will do it another way. But do it we will.

            by Roger Fox on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 08:17:38 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  This is a critique of a specific poll (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sun dog

        Obama could have done well or poorly.  The sample was going to be biased against him, CNN knew this at the outset, and CNN neglected to report the problem with the sample to the public, allowing people to believe that it was representative of the reaction of the entire population.

        This is not, except in an aside, about how well Obama did in the debate.  It's about how terribly CNN did in reporting it and how Markos thinks that calling them on it was unseemly.

        Pro-Occupy Democratic Candidate for California State Senate, District 29 & Occupy OC Civic Liaison.

        "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky

        by Seneca Doane on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:08:15 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  What did you get from my critique above? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Roger Fox

      Answering "why all the fuss" would entail repeating it, at least in summary, so what did you glean from it so far?

      Pro-Occupy Democratic Candidate for California State Senate, District 29 & Occupy OC Civic Liaison.

      "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky

      by Seneca Doane on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:00:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Not sure what the point of this is, now. (6+ / 0-)

    202-224-3121 to Congress in D.C. USE it! You can tell how big a person is by what it takes to discourage them. "We're not perfect, but they're nuts."--Barney Frank 01/02/2012

    by cany on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 04:56:11 PM PST

  •  Pie anyone? n/t (6+ / 0-)

    Ron Reagan: "Sarah Palin's constituency are people who wear red rubber noses and bells on their shoes."

    by AnnetteK on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 04:58:06 PM PST

  •  Your point is valid, BUT (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mdmslle, Just Bob

    I watched the debate and was ready to punch Obama through the screen 5 minutes after it started.

    It was an unmitigated disaster and he totally fucked it up.  And Romney was such an easy mark !!!!  Anybody a year out of law school could have torn Romney apart in that debate, but not Obama.

    And the stakes were so high - the only way he could possibly lose the election was to completely blow the first debate.  And he somehow did.

    In fact, I had to turn it off with a half hour left to go.  So I never would have been included in any poll.  The reason the poll was demographically skewed may be because Dems were so dismayed that they opted out of the poll, not that there was a structural problem with the poll.

  •  All these post-mortems after we WON. (6+ / 0-)

    Can you imagine what a fricking throwdown would be going on around here if we'd LOST?  Christ.

    •  Heh, you want to see Redstate, (4+ / 0-)

      seriously funny.

      This was part of a comment

      4. In 2012, Mitt Romney was surging in the polls a week before the
      election. Then came the hurricane Sandy. Thereafter he lost the election.

      5. No prior hurricane has devastated all major battleground states to this
      degree. Was this the long awaited Was this the long awaited October
      surprise?

      6. Human beings have the ability to manipulate weather patterns. Bush 43
      set up project HAARP to generate sand storms in Iraq. Obama has expanded
      it

      Proceed Daily Kos.

      Ron Reagan: "Sarah Palin's constituency are people who wear red rubber noses and bells on their shoes."

      by AnnetteK on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:02:39 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  This is a specific reply to a specific kos diary (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sun dog, Just Bob

      posted today, currently on the Rec List, and probably soon on the front page.  It's a bunch of revisionist bullshit.  My job, in that case, is to call it what it is.

      Pro-Occupy Democratic Candidate for California State Senate, District 29 & Occupy OC Civic Liaison.

      "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky

      by Seneca Doane on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:02:43 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I didn't think much of it either (5+ / 0-)

        I find the Great Debate Disaster to be kind of a joke in that I felt like it was actually a pretty savvy move from a good poker player.  I started to freak when I saw how much the polls numbers were moving and I was puzzled why Obama didn't act like himself that night.  Then it hit me how it was going to play out in the long run and I stopped freaking out.  Now listening to all these people lecturing about how they fixed Obama by complaining about it enough is just embarrassing.  

        But we aint perfect and my view on it is certainly a minority position that I would never be able to sell unless Obama himself came out and described his strategy the way I saw it.  And that's not what a poker player does.  So I say fuck it.  It's not on me to convince everyone.  

        And your point is valid that our fire should have been directed at the press and lyin Mitt and not the President or each other.  

        When truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

        by Sun dog on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:11:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, I think that he wasn't prepared for the level (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sun dog, Just Bob, kj in missouri

          of craven cynicism and contempt for the public that Romney showed with the Etch-a-Sketch shaking that night.

          This diary isn't so much about the debate though as about CNN/ORC's bad poll and CNN's representation of it and Markos's thinking that pointing out how bad it was -- not based on ignorance but based on solid critique -- was somehow embarrassing and annoying.

          Pro-Occupy Democratic Candidate for California State Senate, District 29 & Occupy OC Civic Liaison.

          "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky

          by Seneca Doane on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:24:20 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yeah, going off on my own thing (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            kj in missouri, Seneca Doane

            Sorry.  It's vexing sometimes when you feel like you know something that is completely unprovable and almost no one really sees it that way you do.  

            But yeah, I follow your point about CNN's bs poll narrative.  It seemed to me that a lot of progressives were so ticked about how Obama's performance made them feel that they were willing to pile on with the knuckelheads in the press regardless of the facts.  

            When truth is only a matter of opinion, advantage goes to the liars.

            by Sun dog on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:54:10 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  I happen to agree with you on two things: (9+ / 0-)

        (a) that Obama's performance in the first debate simply was NOT as awful as the conventional wisdom would have it; and (b) that the risible "snap poll" after the debate, rather than the debate itself, did a lot to create that conventional wisdom.

        However, to object to Markos' "hippie punching" is taking it too far, and too personally.  Fact is, a lot of people around here DID completely lose their wigs, on no rational basis whatsoever, AND they were already doing so BEFORE any snap polls.  I was here on Daily Kos while the debate was going down, watching people's reactions in real time, and they were losing their wigs around here, Seneca, they were losing their MINDS about how terribly Obama was doing.  They didn't need any CNN poll telling them this; they were having the gigantic pants-pooping all by their own selves.  I saw them doing it.

        Sometimes hippies need a punch, quite frankly, and I could have punched a few that might myself.

  •  I thought it was somewhat tongue in cheek (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Broke And Unemployed, mconvente

    when he referred to President Mondale and McGovern.
    I think that took a lot of the sting out from my point of view.

    "If you tell the truth, you won't have to remember anything", Mark Twain

    by Cruzankenny on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 04:59:38 PM PST

  •  All this fighting is ruining Christmas (7+ / 0-)

    NO. MORE. DEALS. Is that clear enough?

    by Fordmandalay on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:01:36 PM PST

  •  I don't think it's an understatement to say (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Miggles, Roger Fox

    Romney's first debate performance probably moved the needle as much or more than any single event in a presidential campaign of the past 30 years.

    It was one of the most impressive things I've ever seen a politician do.

  •  In the immortal words of Megyn Kelly... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Miggles, ConfusedSkyes, glorificus

    "You keep saying that, but he won, Karl, he won."

    I just can't find it in my heart to care.

  •  He is right (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Miggles, ConfusedSkyes

    I was here and I have the same exact take on it as he did.

  •  And the CBS poll? (0+ / 0-)

    Sorry, I don't see how a weird sample would've turned an Obama victory or tie into this bad a result. And CNN's wasn't the only snap poll.

    So sure, let's give Obama 10 of Romney's points from the CNN snap poll. He still lost, and not narrowly.

    Code Monkey like freedom / Code Monkey like peace and justice too
    Code Monkey very nerdy man / With big warm fuzzy bleeding heart
    Code Monkey like you!

    Formerly known as Jyrinx.

    by Code Monkey on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:28:37 PM PST

    •  That makes a huge difference (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kj in missouri

      If it's 59 to 35, people have ample company in thinking that he won.  If it's 69 to 25, the minority is so outnumbered as to be likely to change its mind.

      Believe me, if I could put out a supposedly nationally representative poll showing that my opponent had lost by an almost 3:1 margin, I'd do it every time -- regardless of its merits.  That poll was Romney's strongest ad.

      Pro-Occupy Democratic Candidate for California State Senate, District 29 & Occupy OC Civic Liaison.

      "I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back." -- Saul Alinsky

      by Seneca Doane on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:46:26 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  DOESN'T MATTER. OBAMA WON. DMOW. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Miggles, ConfusedSkyes

    it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses

    by Addison on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 05:47:06 PM PST

  •  Complaining About Gravity (0+ / 0-)

    There are things that are within your control and there are things that are outside your control.  Complaining about Republicans trying to lie and cheat in an election is like complaining that an airplane crash wouldn't have happened except for that darned law of gravity.  It's true that if the Earth didn't tend to pull objects down to the ground airplanes wouldn't crash very often, but every airplane designer knows that the Earth tends to pull objects down to the ground and their job is to design airplanes that will stay up in the air anyway.  Republicans are going to lie and cheat.  It's what they do.  A Democrat's job is to figure out how to beat them anyway.

    Now on to the media.  Everybody on the planet knew that the media wants to sell more soap and Viagra, and they want to talk about a neck-and-neck race rather than a landslide to do it if they possibly can.  It's wrong that they skewed the narrative but it was also absolutely predictable.  If you know that the media will call the race a certain way if you give them a chance then it's your job to not give them that chance.  That's not to say there isn't a point to "working the refs", but if you think you're in trouble because other people did what they always are expected to do then you don't really understand the problem.

    Footnote:  There are pundits I don't put in that category who were also very down on the President's performance.  You can't complain about CNN without recognizing that our beloved Rachel Maddow saw the debate the same way.  I'm a huge Rachel fan, but she's been "Glass-Half-Empty-Girl" from Day One.  She's a worrier.

    •  Look at Maddow's first comments (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      offgrid

      She started to criticize Romney for looking "hyper" but quickly corrected herself.   I joked that Jack Welch (no longer boss of GE/NBC but large shareholder) must have been in the control room like he allegedly was on the 2000 election telling the anchors to call Florida.

      I thought it was sort of a sardonic CT joke until the next day when the good jobs numbers (far more important than a debate) were released.

      Who did we see in the control room?

      Jack Welch

      http://leanforward.msnbc.com/...

      In a heated appearance on MSNBC’s Hardball Friday, Jack Welch doubled down on his unsupported conspiracy theory that the Obama administration cooked the books on today’s improved jobs numbers
  •  Rather than a stab in the back theory (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane

    kos proposed a pat on his own back theory...

    I think he was kind of bored this morning.



    Those who do not move, do not notice their chains. Rosa Luxemburg

    by chuckvw on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 06:03:20 PM PST

  •  nah. (0+ / 0-)

    he was right.

    AND, he WAS only talking about the people who actually perpetrated.  Not ALL of us.

    I had to leave the site fore few days, I dot so disgusted with the handwringing.

    It's okay to freak out.  But Christ on a cracker, spewing it to everyone is counterproductive.


    "A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous..........got me?" - Don Van Vliet

    by AlyoshaKaramazov on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 06:04:32 PM PST

  •  hippie-punching dKos (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane

    Its a feature not a bug

    White-collar conservatives flashing down the street, pointing their plastic finger at me..

    by BOHICA on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 06:07:55 PM PST

  •  To put it another way (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ConfusedSkyes

    The debate reactions of Chris Matthews and Ed Schultz did more to help Obama than Fox News did to Mitt Romney.

    It is extremely important that people in the liberal community not feel afraid to express their honest reaction, no matter how biting that criticism may be. Honest feedback is helpful.

  •  T&R because I like you... (3+ / 0-)

    ...and please remember that if I ever accuse you of annoying liberal freakout, it is a complement.  I mean that, it is part of our high art.

    For me...I think there's a case to be made that all the spin in the world wouldn't get that turkey to fly.  Too many rhetoric jockeys (the sort who train flying turkeys) have pointed out too many flaws, and the thing about a speech is, it has its own power (be it Grand Coulee or a watch battery) independent of the spin.  It wasn't as bad as the worst characterizations, by far, but the whole thing seemed part of the necessary conversation between the President, the polity, his vast apparat, and the zeitgeist.  And as spin, we got the final redemptive storyline.

    ...j'ai découvert que tout le malheur des hommes vient d'une seule chose, qui est de ne savoir pas demeurer en repos dans une chambre.

    by jessical on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 06:11:22 PM PST

  •  I avoid Kos' "Neener, neener!" diaries. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Seneca Doane, twigg

    I tipped and recced his other one about what was awesome.  I'm hoping it works like it does with kids and pets.  Positive reinforcement and all.

    Can you call yourself a real liberal if you aren't reading driftglass?

    by CJB on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 06:49:33 PM PST

  •  It's very hard to gaze at navels (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Roger Fox

    during the euphoric after-glow of what was indeed a triumph.

    I'm not saying that your analysis is incorrect, and it wouldn't matter if it were. The point is that we do have to examine, and re-examine what we say and do, because the consequence of not doing so would turn us into the very echo chamber that has just cost Republicans so dear.

    Despite the hand-wringing (we are Democrats after all), this site does broadly occupy reality, and much of the meta is what keeps it there.

    Markos "shoots from the lip". He has always done that. His greatest weakness is that he sometimes does that. It is also his strength.

    That he has created a place that allows this kind of discussion is testament to the site management. It is only a few short weeks ago that Erick Erickson introduced a policy of banning anyone who mentioned "fact-checking", from RedState.

    I know that many hate this kind of meta discussion. I can see their point yet I can't help but think it is largely just that which makes the place so attractive .... because it informs us all.

    I would also like to add my appreciation for your candidacy ... It's walking the walk. Good Job!

    I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
    but I fear we will remain Democrats.

    by twigg on Fri Nov 09, 2012 at 08:25:31 PM PST

  •  Non-smugness: our turnout way DOWN. (0+ / 0-)

    Turnout in 2012 was down about 9.5 million from 2008, which is crazy given population growth. And it hurt us most: GOP turnout was down about 1.5 million, Dem turnout down nearly 8 million, or 11%.

    All turnout figures from, of course, Wikipedia:

    2008: http://en.wikipedia.org/...

    2012: http://en.wikipedia.org/...

    "The true strength of our nation comes not from the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals." - Barack Obama

    by HeyMikey on Mon Nov 12, 2012 at 12:43:51 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site