Well, that got your attention. And that's what we'll be hearing for the next four years if HRC and BO keep doing a number on each other. In all fairness, to me it sounds as if Hillary is shrill and nasty and all those bad things, though Barack is apparently beginning to tire of being her punching bag and is starting to respond in kind.
Once again, the Democrats have seemingly believed that they will do better as underdogs, as Bill Clinton had been sixteen years ago (my word! has it been that long??), and so, from a "can't lose" position, the Dems have seized the initiative, thrown themselves into the mud, and decided to sling it -- at each other. I cannot believe how stupidly both sides, and especially HRC once her advisors and she realized that she wasn't going to waltz into the White House, have behaved. Worse, now that the media realizes that it probably has been giving Obama a free ride, the reporters are looking for anything that may smell in his background and behavior.
Meanwhile, McCain is getting the free ride. No, I'm not thinking of moving to Canada, eh? I don't like some of McCain's proposed statements, but the new desk chair I got for our anniversary would make a better president than dubya has been, even without me in it. Maybe especially without me in it.
If the election were held right now, President McCain would take office in January 2009. My hope is that the Democrats will start behaving more credibly as presidential candidates, that they will coalesce and support whoever gets the nomination, and that we'll have a Democrat in the White House and more Democrats in the House and the Senate come January. My hope right now also is that I'll win the lottery, and live happily ever after. Yes, yes, I know the punchline: "meet me halfway: buy a ticket." Right now, none of these hopes looks good. But it's a long time until November 4, and American memories can be short. Look how John McCain has been resurrected from the number that Rove's Raiders did on him just eight short years ago.
The Democrats need to start acting like they actually want to win the White House, not because HRC and BO want to be president but because Democratic policies are GOOD for America, and dubya's policies have been bad for America. To win the White House, they need to make nice to one another, and to look at the numbers.
And that brings me to Ed Rendell.
Ed Rendell, governor of Pennsylvania, has been publicly touted as a possible Vice Presidential choice. He’d be excellent. Except it would be a waste of that spot to give it to someone from Pennsylvania. The Democrats MUST win PA to win the presidential election, but if they can’t win it without using the VP slot on the ticket to do so, they probably won’t win the election. They need to give the VP slot to someone who can bring with him a red state. The Democrats have to keep PA in the blue column without using the VP prize to do so.
And, as Liz Sidoti has written (AP, March 4, 2008), “As Ohio goes, so goes the nation — at least for the past 44 years.” Take a hint, donkeys: Ted Strickland or Sherrod Brown. But wait. There's more.
They're going to have trouble holding Minnesota in the blue column this year, especially if Governor Pawlenty is the Republican VP candidate. If they lose MN, they will need to win Ohio AND Florida. The Democratic delegates need to decide which of those two states the Democrats can win in November without using the VP position, and then choose an elected official from the other state as the VP. That leaves Jim Webb of Virginia out of the loop, and I don't like that idea, but right now I think they need both OH and FL, to provide some additional security against the possibility of losing MN.
However, all is fluid, and come October, especially if the stock market has really tanked, the picture could be vastly different.
triton
Friday, March 21, 2008
Sunday, March 16, 2008
#13 Politics and the Dow Jones Utilities Average. Plus a teaser about Ed Rendell
That title is a mouthful. But the way the Democrats are attacking each other right now, it may also be the Democrats' best chance to win the election.
Helene Meisler, stock market technical analyst on TheStreet.com, pointed out (3/3/08) that the Dow Jones Utility average hit an apparent high just near the end of 2007. Further, the DJUA may break out--on the downside--of its current head-and-shoulders pattern. Historically, here’s what has happened recently in similar circumstances (quoting Meisler):
“In 1987 the Utes [the Dow Jones Utilities average] made their highs five months before the market did and 7 months before the Crash. In the 2000-2002 bear market, they made their highs in December 2000 well after the major averages did. This time [2007-2008] they made twin highs in December and January.”
If the DJUtilities Average does break down over the next few weeks, we could have a subsequent breakdown in the DJIndustrial Average (and likely the market in general) sometime this summer or, for neatness of appearance and similarity to other market breakdowns (“crashes”), in October 2008. That kind of stock action would bode VERY well for the Democrats, since the crash would occur under a dubya administration and just before the election.
If the DJUtilities Average closes below about 474, it will have broken down out of its head-and-shoulders pattern, and could test the 471 it hit in late August 2007. If it drops below that level, its next major test areas are in the 450 range, then the 420 range, and, going back to March 2006 and November/December 2005, the 390 range. I’m certainly not saying it will drop that far, just that the Utilities average appears right now to be testing a breakdown and has some serious technical downside risk.
So here we are with math again. Sorry 'bout that. But a stock market debacle anytime between July and October would have a major effect on the election, despite the current debacle between HRC and BO. Right now it appears that John McCain is being given pretty much a free ride (some of his religious advisors notwithstanding) while the Democratic hopefuls attack each other. Stupid, stupid way to run for president, Hillary and Barack. Will it take a bunch of gas and electric companies to come to their rescue? On the other hand, the DJUA could test 474, recover, and move up, taking the rest of the market with it. In that case, HRC and BO better mend their fences in a hurry.
Next time: Ed Rendell, current governor of Pennsylvania, former mayor of Philadelphia, and apparently lots of people's favorite choice for VP on the Democratic ticket. Why triton says no.
triton
Helene Meisler, stock market technical analyst on TheStreet.com, pointed out (3/3/08) that the Dow Jones Utility average hit an apparent high just near the end of 2007. Further, the DJUA may break out--on the downside--of its current head-and-shoulders pattern. Historically, here’s what has happened recently in similar circumstances (quoting Meisler):
“In 1987 the Utes [the Dow Jones Utilities average] made their highs five months before the market did and 7 months before the Crash. In the 2000-2002 bear market, they made their highs in December 2000 well after the major averages did. This time [2007-2008] they made twin highs in December and January.”
If the DJUtilities Average does break down over the next few weeks, we could have a subsequent breakdown in the DJIndustrial Average (and likely the market in general) sometime this summer or, for neatness of appearance and similarity to other market breakdowns (“crashes”), in October 2008. That kind of stock action would bode VERY well for the Democrats, since the crash would occur under a dubya administration and just before the election.
If the DJUtilities Average closes below about 474, it will have broken down out of its head-and-shoulders pattern, and could test the 471 it hit in late August 2007. If it drops below that level, its next major test areas are in the 450 range, then the 420 range, and, going back to March 2006 and November/December 2005, the 390 range. I’m certainly not saying it will drop that far, just that the Utilities average appears right now to be testing a breakdown and has some serious technical downside risk.
So here we are with math again. Sorry 'bout that. But a stock market debacle anytime between July and October would have a major effect on the election, despite the current debacle between HRC and BO. Right now it appears that John McCain is being given pretty much a free ride (some of his religious advisors notwithstanding) while the Democratic hopefuls attack each other. Stupid, stupid way to run for president, Hillary and Barack. Will it take a bunch of gas and electric companies to come to their rescue? On the other hand, the DJUA could test 474, recover, and move up, taking the rest of the market with it. In that case, HRC and BO better mend their fences in a hurry.
Next time: Ed Rendell, current governor of Pennsylvania, former mayor of Philadelphia, and apparently lots of people's favorite choice for VP on the Democratic ticket. Why triton says no.
triton
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
#12 The Numbers "Game"
You may be thinking that it’s too bad we can’t just nominate and elect the most-qualified people and forget about the strategy of getting 270 electoral votes. I agree wholeheartedly. It is too bad. But we can’t look at the history, especially the recent history, of presidential politics and say that we’ve always, or even often, elected the most qualified candidates. We haven’t.
However well or poorly we think our presidents have performed once in office, Eisenhower the candidate was not more qualified than Stevenson, Kennedy was not more qualified than Nixon (I can’t believe I’m saying something not-negative about Richard Nixon!), Reagan was NOT more qualified than Walter Mondale, Bill Clinton was probably not more qualified than HW, and dubya was most definitely not more qua…. Ohhh,…the Humanity.
Besides, in this current election, all three possible major party candidates are likely qualified to lead the country, though BO has less experience than HRC who has less experience than JMcC. And I disagree with JMcC’s proposals most of the three. We can debate what “qualified” means anyway. The point is that we need to change the direction of the country, and it’s not going to happen enough, or possibly at all, under another Republican administration. Hence, we play the political numbers game. Except that it’s not a game. It’s deadly serious. And it’s been particularly deadly for our armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for untold thousands of civilians there. John McCain said he is willing to keep our troops in Iraq “for a hundred years” if necessary.
No, this is no game.
And now, with tweve posts in a month, I think it’s time to let political matters settle down a bit. Let’s give the two major parties awhile, including today’s primaries in Ohio and Texas which pundits are saying may yield something resembling conclusive results. My thought is to give the Democrats and Republicans perhaps until later this month, before we continue to tell them how to conduct their campaigns. Oh. Wait. They’re not reading this blog.
Well, I’ll wait a couple of weeks anyway, say, until the week of March 17. At that time, I’ll have some thoughts on how one part of the economy in particular might play an even bigger role in the election than we currently expect. And then I’ll identify, at this early point at least, what I believe the likely swing states are going to be. In the meantime, feel free to add your own comments on the blog or by email. I look forward to them.
As they might say in Ahia and Texas, Y’all be well, now, y’hear.
triton
However well or poorly we think our presidents have performed once in office, Eisenhower the candidate was not more qualified than Stevenson, Kennedy was not more qualified than Nixon (I can’t believe I’m saying something not-negative about Richard Nixon!), Reagan was NOT more qualified than Walter Mondale, Bill Clinton was probably not more qualified than HW, and dubya was most definitely not more qua…. Ohhh,…the Humanity.
Besides, in this current election, all three possible major party candidates are likely qualified to lead the country, though BO has less experience than HRC who has less experience than JMcC. And I disagree with JMcC’s proposals most of the three. We can debate what “qualified” means anyway. The point is that we need to change the direction of the country, and it’s not going to happen enough, or possibly at all, under another Republican administration. Hence, we play the political numbers game. Except that it’s not a game. It’s deadly serious. And it’s been particularly deadly for our armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and for untold thousands of civilians there. John McCain said he is willing to keep our troops in Iraq “for a hundred years” if necessary.
No, this is no game.
And now, with tweve posts in a month, I think it’s time to let political matters settle down a bit. Let’s give the two major parties awhile, including today’s primaries in Ohio and Texas which pundits are saying may yield something resembling conclusive results. My thought is to give the Democrats and Republicans perhaps until later this month, before we continue to tell them how to conduct their campaigns. Oh. Wait. They’re not reading this blog.
Well, I’ll wait a couple of weeks anyway, say, until the week of March 17. At that time, I’ll have some thoughts on how one part of the economy in particular might play an even bigger role in the election than we currently expect. And then I’ll identify, at this early point at least, what I believe the likely swing states are going to be. In the meantime, feel free to add your own comments on the blog or by email. I look forward to them.
As they might say in Ahia and Texas, Y’all be well, now, y’hear.
triton
Saturday, March 1, 2008
#11 Strategies Two and Three
In 2000 and 2004, we saw how the Republican propaganda machine can take a decorated war hero, a veteran who served more nobly in the service than dubya did, and make him appear cowardly, inept, everything their own candidate actually was. In 2000, they attacked John McCain in the primaries; in 2004, they attacked John Kerry in the election. They may try something more obvious this time.
If, as appears increasingly likely, Barack Obama receives the Democratic nomination, we can expect the Republicans to hit him with every form of a liberal label that they can. And they will be right this time. Obama is a liberal.
And that’s precisely why they may not succeed. If he embraces the label, if he stands up proudly and has his own hatchet speakers call his opponents reactionaries or some similar, negatively connotative term (how about “floggers of dead policies that kill”? or some other mixed metaphor), we may actually see this election depending on new young voters, and middle-aged and older voters, who also embrace the label. “Liberal” is a dirty word for many Republicans, but Barack Obama could have the opportunity to reclaim the word—and the Presidency.
He must not apologize for being liberal. He must not back down from the term. He must show how his proposed policies are good for the country. NOT apologizing for being liberal, NOT backing down from embracing the term: this is strategy number two for the Democrats this fall.
Strategy number three is a contingency strategy. In case neither the presidential nor vice presidential candidate on the Democratic ticket has significant foreign policy experience, the Democrats should leak the name(s) of the one or more people who may be considered for Secretary of State (Bill Richardson is one who comes to mind, but there are others) in order to assuage the concerns of those who recognize how badly we’ve fared under dubya’s administrations. This is, incidentally, another reason why Obama’s VP candidate doesn’t have to be a governor. As I’ve indicated in post #9’s rebuttal of Liz Sidoti’s 2/23/08 Associated Press article, the Democrats also don’t need to run a governor for VP in order to get his “managerial” experience; other members of the Obama or Clinton administration can serve that function, though I suspect that Hillary—should she somehow recover and get the nomination--is a pretty darn good nitty-gritty manager.
As always, I welcome your comments, your emails, or, as one of my not-favorite televangelists used to say (one word spelled a bit phonetically), "your prayers and your corntribushuns." While he meant money, I mean your ideas on the strategies for the upcoming election.
triton
If, as appears increasingly likely, Barack Obama receives the Democratic nomination, we can expect the Republicans to hit him with every form of a liberal label that they can. And they will be right this time. Obama is a liberal.
And that’s precisely why they may not succeed. If he embraces the label, if he stands up proudly and has his own hatchet speakers call his opponents reactionaries or some similar, negatively connotative term (how about “floggers of dead policies that kill”? or some other mixed metaphor), we may actually see this election depending on new young voters, and middle-aged and older voters, who also embrace the label. “Liberal” is a dirty word for many Republicans, but Barack Obama could have the opportunity to reclaim the word—and the Presidency.
He must not apologize for being liberal. He must not back down from the term. He must show how his proposed policies are good for the country. NOT apologizing for being liberal, NOT backing down from embracing the term: this is strategy number two for the Democrats this fall.
Strategy number three is a contingency strategy. In case neither the presidential nor vice presidential candidate on the Democratic ticket has significant foreign policy experience, the Democrats should leak the name(s) of the one or more people who may be considered for Secretary of State (Bill Richardson is one who comes to mind, but there are others) in order to assuage the concerns of those who recognize how badly we’ve fared under dubya’s administrations. This is, incidentally, another reason why Obama’s VP candidate doesn’t have to be a governor. As I’ve indicated in post #9’s rebuttal of Liz Sidoti’s 2/23/08 Associated Press article, the Democrats also don’t need to run a governor for VP in order to get his “managerial” experience; other members of the Obama or Clinton administration can serve that function, though I suspect that Hillary—should she somehow recover and get the nomination--is a pretty darn good nitty-gritty manager.
As always, I welcome your comments, your emails, or, as one of my not-favorite televangelists used to say (one word spelled a bit phonetically), "your prayers and your corntribushuns." While he meant money, I mean your ideas on the strategies for the upcoming election.
triton
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)