POTD, QOTD

Desperation (4.00 / 2)

Interesting how primaries exaggerate the importance of out-of-state endorsements by about 3000x their actual value.

I remember the '96 Senate primary between Dick Swett and John Rauh.  Dick publicized his endorsement from Pat Schroeder, John challenged it, and the two men spent a week arguing in the press over public support from a woman with 1-2% name recognition in the State of New Hampshire.  They were so focused on one-upping each others' progressive bona fides that they ignored everything else.

Credit Binnie for scaring Ayotte and Kochvar (who also has jailbird Duke Cunningham credentials) into grasping for Palin's support.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 02:24:59 AM UTC

Sometime we gotta figure out how (4.00 / 1)

to have useful primaries. Air real issues, minimal unnecessary bloodshed, shakedown cruise for the nominee, unite after the vote.

We can work on that right after we fix campaign finance.

---

by: elwood @ Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 02:31:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree with your prioritizing. (0.00 / 0)

Without getting all the money out of the process, changing anything else will probably not matter.  
But I must say "useful primaries" sounds good.  So do "real issues."

---

by: Lucy Edwards @ Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 09:27:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Better yet, let's figure out how we recruit good candidates (0.00 / 0)

for public office.  Letting the Chamber of Commerce and the Realtors' Association and the Car Dealers of America do it is not a recipe for success.  Candidates aren't "bought" by industries, no more than votes are bought.  Candidates are selected by interest groups and groomed for the public arena.  It's something that's second nature to groupists and/or groupies and something that independent agents (Democrats) aren't very good at.

We want to trust independent judgment, but how can you trust the judgment of someone who does whatever you want?  It's a conundrum.  It requires faith, humility and the ability to wait for your turn.  Everybody can have what they want, IF they take turns.  It's a matter of time.

Of course, that's not likely to be understood by people who have no sense of time -- people who live in the ineffable now.

---

by: hannah @ Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 11:54:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

When will Sarah's 15 minutes be used up? n/t (0.00 / 0)

...the Doo Dah Man once told me you've got to play your hand. Sometimes the cards ain't worth a dime if you don't lay 'em down.

---

by: rambler american @ Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 10:19:38 AM UTC

The GOP candidates are tripping over themselves... (4.00 / 1)

...trying to pandering to a shrill, shrinking, but politically very active base in the primary, with the hope that they can re-fram their message for the general.  What else explains Charlie Bass's pitiful embrace of the Tea Party (while wiping the dirt from his hands after shaing theirs) and anyone seeking Palin's support in NH?

I spoke to Bill Binnie months ago about marriage equality, and he emphatically stated he was against it...but Cornerstone is running ads against him implying he might support it - not because he would, but because of the GrokClone Makeup of the remaining Republican Party in NH.

---

by: Tully Fitzsimmons @ Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 10:54:27 AM UTC

Running ads against a candidate who's actually on your (0.00 / 0)

(authoritarian, conservative, depriving) side is a tactic successfully deployed by the Club for Growth to make their candidates appear more moderate and socially responsive than they are.  It worked beautifully for them in Iowa in propelling Huckabee's "surge."

Pandering to a shrill cohort gets candidates "free" media attention.  Free media, as opposed to canned ads, is important because it creates the impression in the minds of casually attentive voters that the person or issue being covered is important.  

Anybody can become President (most people wouldn't want to), but getting into the paper is special.  Most people don't do it until they're dead.

---

by: hannah @ Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 11:39:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The importance of that banner lies in the word "TRUE" (0.00 / 0)

It's designed to counter any suggestion that these women are either false or fake or wrong BEFORE the suggestion is even made.  Once that image or idea is in place, then any contrary suggestion can be rejected, not on its merits, but as an effort to be contrary and negative.  

Conservative messaging always aims to be preemptive -- to deprive the opponent of an opportunity to exploit one's known weakness (Kelly's relationship with facts, the truth) and to present the opponent's strength as a weakness (hard to defend).

We need to keep in mind that conservatives see the electorate and their potential representatives as enemies.  And enemies deserve to be deceived.

So, conservative PR is bound to be deceptive.

Take a look at the Odell,Simms,Lynch, Inc. website to get a taste of their attitude towards their "marks."  Robert J. Odell, Jr., btw, the founder of this outfit, is our very own State Senator Bob Odell.

---

by: hannah @ Wed Jul 28, 2010 at 12:14:10 PM UTC