from Dahlia Lithwick in Slate (hat tip: InstaPundit).
I suppose he still has time to implode, Howard Dean style, but I wouldn't bet on it.
Hilary is lucky, but she's not that lucky.
...my point wasn't that Republicans hate and Democrats don't, it was that Republicans hate *as* political strategy. Or in other words, Bush went to war, and caused [Democrats] to hate him. Obama is being hated for - being the likely Democratic nominee.
Oh, and sure, while Democrats certainly have no love for Bush or other Republicans, this certainly wasn't true until after Iraq (which was pretty polarizing)
Up until the fall of 2002, we mainly mocked GWB for not being a terribly strong leader.
Oh, and sure, while Democrats certainly have no love for Bush or other Republicans, this certainly wasn't true until after Iraq (which was pretty polarizing) - and in any event, most Democrats now who support a candidate do so because they genuinely like that candidate, rather than based on sneering insults of Republicans.
Justin's point was that Republicans have changed there tune about Obama since he became the front runner. Justin finds that somehow noteworthy. Did Justin believe Republicans would not oppose Obama? Or let's put it in your terms: Did Justin's AUDIENCE believe Republicans would not oppose Obama?
This is the way the Republicans make a living in national politics, by destroying their opponents. That's their bread and butter. They don't care if they are hypocritical . They don't care if they are fair. They don't care if they're dealing with doctored evidence. They don't care anything about that. That's their deal. They are not interested in governing and changing. They are very interested in maintaining power.
But I must disagree strongly with Justin's claim that partisan warfare and BDS broke out as a result of the Iraq War. That is political revisionism, plain and simple.
The Democrats' outrage over the 2000 election was, at a minimum, the starting point for BDS.
Gary Anderson wrote:
For all those who think/thought Obama would pull in conservative votes, did it ever occur to anyone that many are/were just voting Obama so McCain would have a lesser inexperienced senator to compare himself to in the general election?
Thad, the fierce and cunning political observer wrote:
Obama is Kucinich with gravitas. Hillary is Bill with far less charm. McCain's McCain.
Obama is Kucinich with gravitas.
The wonderful irony of that Wikipedia page is this at the very bottom:
This article about an American journalist is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.
Gary Anderson wrote:
"...if she actually had a "record of achievement", I'd expect a few details would have leaked out by now."
The woman has shown she can fight Republicans. Obama's apparent strategy is to get them to like him sooooo much, that everyone will just join hands and kumbaya our way to peace. Like her or not, Clinton has shown she can work with Democrats to push back against Republicans who quite clearly know what they're doing in battle. I think she's learned from her husband's administration mistakes, and keenly understands how Washington today works.
He's a chump if he believes in what he's saying today.