The 2008 presidential field at-a-glance

[shinerbock]

McCain is being represented by Bob Bennett which I find to be very interesting (considering ole Robert is a huge lib).

Having read the article now, I think the timing is extremely questionable. If anyone has read my posts about McCain, they know I'm not overly fond of him, but there doesn't seem to be much new information here.

I think with MSNBC cowering to the Democratic candidates and with this NYT stir, media outlets are beginning to show their hand. Granted, we all knew where these entities stood, but even the "independent" Chris Matthews is visibly giddy about anything Obama, which is a nice compliment to Keith "Bush is a murderer" Olbermann. Should be an interesting summer.

[DaemonSeid]

....this is getting like a soap opera so we may need to get a bigger bag of popcorn....

Ok..let's see what we got so far this week

Obama and McCain wins
Clinton accuses Obama of plagiarism
Chelsea still funny looking
Michelle verbally gaffes
Hardball doesn't know an Osama from an Obama
O'Reilly gaffes defending Obama's alleged militancy
Olberman and MSNBC like hungry sharks go after O'Reilly
The Wiseguys endorse Obama
John attacks Barack on finance pledging
Cindy tells how proud she is of her country and her husband.
NY Times goes ito tabloid mode on John alleging that he had an affair
John accuses Times of smearing
Today John will have a press conference in which he will ask the press and his wife..."Who are you gonna believe....me or your lying eyes?"

o yeah...there is a full moon out this week...

Sooooooooo........

Will Michelle put a muzzle on it?
Will Hillary pay for an extreme make over on Chelsea?
Will Barack put a hit out on Hillary?
Will we find out that secretly Farrakahn was cooking grits and playing calypso in Obama's kitchen?
Will Cindy believe John over her lying eyes?
Will we find John's Weapons of Impotent Destruction?
Will Bill and Keith just shut the hell up?
Will we all die from poisoning of feul from a shot down sattelite or Sick Cow disease?

Stay tuned for more oooooooooooooonnnnnn.....


As the Poll Turns......

[jon1856]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

McCain is being represented by Bob Bennett which I find to be very interesting (considering ole Robert is a huge lib).

Having read the article now, I think the timing is extremely questionable. If anyone has read my posts about McCain, they know I'm not overly fond of him, but there doesn't seem to be much new information here.

I think with MSNBC cowering to the Democratic candidates and with this NYT stir, media outlets are beginning to show their hand. Granted, we all knew where these entities stood, but even the "independent" Chris Matthews is visibly giddy about anything Obama, which is a nice compliment to Keith "Bush is a murderer" Olbermann. Should be an interesting summer.

I saw CNN coverage this morning and all they covered was the first three paragraphs of the story.
And Mac's denial of what was in those three paragraphs

Nothing was said about the rest of it....
Story goes much deeper than that.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by jon1856

I saw CNN coverage this morning and all they covered was the first three paragraphs of the story.
And Mac's denial of what was in those three paragraphs

Nothing was said about the rest of it....
Story goes much deeper than that.

Deeper how? This has all been out since December, and there is almost no substantive information in the Times article. Woodward claims that he personally gave the NYT numerous examples of McCain acting against the interest of the firm's clients.

I think the real depth is that the Times waited to release this until McCain won the nomination (basically), and the possible battle with the New Republic.

[UGAalum94]

Yeah, but isn't it better for McCain that they hit this stuff relative early? It can't really stay alive until the general election, do you think? And as long as he's been in politics, most of the skeletons have to be out of his closet, right?

The NY Times piece was entertaining, and I think that McCain will certainly be the most conservative person in the general election.

[jon1856]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Yeah, but isn't it better for McCain that they hit this stuff relative early? It can't really stay alive until the general election, do you think? And as long as he's been in politics, most of the skeletons have to be out of his closet, right?

The NY Times piece was entertaining, and I think that McCain will certainly be the most conservative person in the general election.

The saving and loan matter may still come back to bit him.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by jon1856

The saving and loan matter may still come back to bit him.

Yeah, but it's not new. I suppose it may be back beyond some voters political memory.

Do you think it has new life? Are we more interested in financial corruption than we used to be? Or is it just that if Obama is the DNC nominee that he doesn't have any baggage, which it the upside of having relatively little experience, so his campaign can trot McCain's past out there with little fear?

Clinton, if she somehow manages to pull out the nomination, probably won't be as interested in playing the "who is more associated with sketchy dealings" game.

[jon1856]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Yeah, but it's not new. I suppose it may be back beyond some voters political memory.

Do you think it has new life? Are we more interested in financial corruption than we used to be? Or is it just that if Obama is the DNC nominee that he doesn't have any baggage, which it the upside of having relatively little experience, so his campaign can trot McCain's past out there with little fear?

Clinton, if she somehow manages to pull out the nomination, probably won't be as interested in playing the "who is more associated with sketchy dealings" game.

Time will only tell.
What ever happens, most likely will be from "swift-boat" type groups rather than the parties themselves.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Yeah, but isn't it better for McCain that they hit this stuff relative early? It can't really stay alive until the general election, do you think? And as long as he's been in politics, most of the skeletons have to be out of his closet, right?

The NY Times piece was entertaining, and I think that McCain will certainly be the most conservative person in the general election.

In politics, things can stay alive for a very long time. After all, some who dislike Hilary say that it's because of how she handled her husband's infidelity, which was a very long time ago now. And Edward Kennedy and Chappaquidick... that cost him a Presidential nomination. Other things seem to go away quickly and easily.

[nittanyalum]

Oh good lawd, now Huck's on SNL still trying to prove what a hilarious, "normal", everyday guy he is.



ETA: LOL at Tina Fey's spot on Weekend Update -- "So get on board, Ohio and Texas, bitch is the new black!"

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by AGDee

In politics, things can stay alive for a very long time. After all, some who dislike Hilary say that it's because of how she handled her husband's infidelity, which was a very long time ago now. And Edward Kennedy and Chappaquidick... that cost him a Presidential nomination. Other things seem to go away quickly and easily.

Can we really compare anything to Chappaquidick?

Personally, I've always been amazed he had a career at all after that, rather than serving time on criminal charges, and I also don't think Teddy fundamentally had the character to be a presidential nominee, do you?

I kind of doubt that any of the Kennedy family could survive the kind of media scrutiny we hit people with today, and I'm not sure if it's a bad thing. I go back and forth.

I can see what you mean about how some issue are always out there, but at some point, isn't most of the damage related to the story at least predictable or controllable?

There's some novelty to the story for new voters maybe, but is it really going to swing anyone who knew about it before.

It seems to me that once you've made a fundamental evaluation about whether a candidate's character is acceptable, recycled bad press isn't going to influence you that much. But maybe I'm wrong.

[nittanyalum]

Here's a link to watch Tina Fey's Weekend Update bit on SNL last night. I missed the monologue, so I was happy that was on this page too -- http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/tin...ve_blast_obama

[ThetaDancer]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Granted, we all knew where these entities stood, but even the "independent" Chris Matthews is visibly giddy about anything Obama, which is a nice compliment to Keith "Bush is a murderer" Olbermann. Should be an interesting summer.

Do you really think Chris Matthews is visibly giddy about anything Obama?
On Monday, he flashed a picture of Osama bin Laden when talking about Obama, then gave some half-assed apology and blamed it on someone else after a ton of people complained.
On Tuesday, when covering the primary in Wisconsin, Matthews raised his voice and interrupted someone he was interviewing in Texas who was supporting Obama. Matthews started going after this man so aggressively that his co-hosts had to calm him down. He then shouted "why do you think they call this Hardball?"...only to have his co-hosts remind him that it wasn't in fact Hardball, it was just election coverage. They then switched to something else...when they came back to the coverage, all of the other co-hosts were still there but Matthews was off the set.
Neither of those cases, both within the past few days, really sound like being giddy over Obama.

[shinerbock]

Originally Posted by ThetaDancer

Do you really think Chris Matthews is visibly giddy about anything Obama?
On Monday, he flashed a picture of Osama bin Laden when talking about Obama, then gave some half-assed apology and blamed it on someone else after a ton of people complained.
On Tuesday, when covering the primary in Wisconsin, Matthews raised his voice and interrupted someone he was interviewing in Texas who was supporting Obama. Matthews started going after this man so aggressively that his co-hosts had to calm him down. He then shouted "why do you think they call this Hardball?"...only to have his co-hosts remind him that it wasn't in fact Hardball, it was just election coverage. They then switched to something else...when they came back to the coverage, all of the other co-hosts were still there but Matthews was off the set.
Neither of those cases, both within the past few days, really sound like being giddy over Obama.

He didn't show the picture of Osama. You can give credit to Chris for a lot, but he doesn't run the graphics for his show. The articles on the matter clearly claim that someone in that department was reprimanded.

Yes, I've seen Matthews several times talk about Obama very spiritedly, including the infamous "chill up my leg" or whatever that comment was. To his credit, I do think he has hammered some supporters about naming Barack's accomplishments. However, his personal preferences are no secret, and it often bleeds into his on air persona.

[ThetaDancer]

^^^ Right, I know he doesn't run the graphics for his show. I just think that if he was such a gung-ho Obama fan, he would have been more apologetic. Maybe he was just trying to save face and just brush off the issue?
Full disclosure: I'm not at all a fan of Chris Matthews, and I'm pretty critical of his behavior this week.