Comments on: Is Obama the Greatest Machine Politician of Our Time? http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/ The blog of the mystery writer, screenwriter and CEO of Pajamas Media Wed, 15 Feb 2012 22:41:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Demosophist http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94654 Demosophist Fri, 30 May 2008 00:56:30 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94654 Er, pardon my finger-counting. The better part of two decades. Er, pardon my finger-counting. The better part of two decades.

]]> By: Demosophist http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94653 Demosophist Fri, 30 May 2008 00:52:27 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94653 Roy: Point taken about the 30-year cycle. If we figure the current Republican cycle began in 1994 (with a few ups and downs) it still has about a decade left in the tank. However, the Republicans have been particularly foolish about squandering their advantages. The biggest thing the Republicans have going for them is that there really don't seem to be any new ideas hatching in the opposition's nest. Meanwhile yet another central European country <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2008/02/22/poland-to-join-flat-tax-club/" rel="nofollow">orbits the flat tax</a>. Roy:

Point taken about the 30-year cycle. If we figure the current Republican cycle began in 1994 (with a few ups and downs) it still has about a decade left in the tank. However, the Republicans have been particularly foolish about squandering their advantages. The biggest thing the Republicans have going for them is that there really don’t seem to be any new ideas hatching in the opposition’s nest.

Meanwhile yet another central European country orbits the flat tax.

]]> By: Demosophist http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94652 Demosophist Fri, 30 May 2008 00:35:12 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94652 I still can't believe nothing at all was made of his "58 states in the union" gaff. It was mentioned once on FOX that I know of, and nowhere else. Can you imagine such a thing happening to McCain... or anyone else, including Hillary? And no fair mentioning his middle name, or saying anything remotely relevant concerning his wife's rhetorical attacks. Camelot vs Mudville could be a rather one-sided contest. I still can’t believe nothing at all was made of his “58 states in the union” gaff. It was mentioned once on FOX that I know of, and nowhere else. Can you imagine such a thing happening to McCain… or anyone else, including Hillary? And no fair mentioning his middle name, or saying anything remotely relevant concerning his wife’s rhetorical attacks. Camelot vs Mudville could be a rather one-sided contest.

]]> By: Roy Lofquist http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94651 Roy Lofquist Wed, 28 May 2008 21:14:24 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94651 Dear Sirs, I have been following politics for a while. Since 1952. I have never seen the conventional wisdom about an election more baseless. Why Obama? Charisma, ideas, hope? None of these or any other reasons that have been bandied about. It's Obama because he is not Hillary. The Clintons embarrassed the Democratic Party. Many, many Democrats were ashamed of their President. They do not want to see Billary in the White House ever again, even as visitors. Note that Obama won in the caucus states where the politically active determine the outcome. A Democratic year? How do you figure? Because the New York Times says so? Look at 2006! Yes, let's look at it. In the preceding 6 midterm elections where the incumbent President's party lost seats the average loss in the Senate was 6.1, in the House 29.33. In 2006 the Republicans lost 7 in the Senate and 30 in the House. Pretty ho-hum. Let's look at the Democratic Presidents. JFK and Nixon tied in the popular vote, even though Nixon was extremely unpopular. LBJ beat Goldwater in 1964. Kennedy had been assassinated, we were in the middle of a war and Goldwater was a radical. Carter beat Ford in 1980. Nixon had resigned because of Watergate and Ford was an appointed Vice President. Clinton beat GHWB in 1992 with only 37% of the vote. Ross Perot got 19% which, arguably, was 60-70% Republicans. It seems that Democrats only win in extreme circumstances. In our history we have seen stretches where one party controlled Congress that average about 30 years with occasional one-term reversals. From where I'm sitting it doesn't look at all like a Democratic year. Regards, Roy Lofquist Dear Sirs,

I have been following politics for a while. Since 1952. I have never seen the conventional wisdom about an election more baseless.

Why Obama? Charisma, ideas, hope? None of these or any other reasons that have been bandied about. It’s Obama because he is not Hillary.

The Clintons embarrassed the Democratic Party. Many, many Democrats were ashamed of their President. They do not want to see Billary in the White House ever again, even as visitors. Note that Obama won in the caucus states where the politically active determine the outcome.

A Democratic year? How do you figure? Because the New York Times says so? Look at 2006! Yes, let’s look at it. In the preceding 6 midterm elections where the incumbent President’s party lost seats the average loss in the Senate was 6.1, in the House 29.33. In 2006 the Republicans lost 7 in the Senate and 30 in the House. Pretty ho-hum.

Let’s look at the Democratic Presidents.

JFK and Nixon tied in the popular vote, even though Nixon was extremely unpopular.

LBJ beat Goldwater in 1964. Kennedy had been assassinated, we were in the middle of a war and Goldwater was a radical.

Carter beat Ford in 1980. Nixon had resigned because of Watergate and Ford was an appointed Vice President.

Clinton beat GHWB in 1992 with only 37% of the vote. Ross Perot got 19% which, arguably, was 60-70% Republicans.

It seems that Democrats only win in extreme circumstances.

In our history we have seen stretches where one party controlled Congress that average about 30 years with occasional one-term reversals.

From where I’m sitting it doesn’t look at all like a Democratic year.

Regards,

Roy Lofquist

]]> By: ras http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94650 ras Tue, 27 May 2008 23:29:56 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94650 The nature of Obama's many gaffes indicate a man insufficiently adept to accomplish what you accuse him of, Roger. A better explanation is that he is merely the chosen frontman/face for those who run him. The nature of Obama’s many gaffes indicate a man insufficiently adept to accomplish what you accuse him of, Roger. A better explanation is that he is merely the chosen frontman/face for those who run him.

]]> By: Buddy Larsen http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94649 Buddy Larsen Tue, 27 May 2008 22:27:31 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94649 what, y'all don't want the Reverend Wright as your Secretary of State? Bill Ayres as Secretary of Defense? Achmadinejad, Chavez, and Castro sleeping over in the Lincoln Bedroom? Party Poopers. what, y’all don’t want the Reverend Wright as your Secretary of State? Bill Ayres as Secretary of Defense? Achmadinejad, Chavez, and Castro sleeping over in the Lincoln Bedroom? Party Poopers.

]]> By: TerryeL http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94648 TerryeL Tue, 27 May 2008 19:24:53 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94648 Just a couple of days ago I saw that McCain was ahead in both the Gallup and Rasmussen tracking polls. And some analysts give McCain an advantage in the electoral count. It is way too soon to tell, but it seems to me that Obama should be way ahead right now, and he isn't. I think a lot of people have questions about him, press or no press. But that does not mean he will not win. Just a couple of days ago I saw that McCain was ahead in both the Gallup and Rasmussen tracking polls. And some analysts give McCain an advantage in the electoral count. It is way too soon to tell, but it seems to me that Obama should be way ahead right now, and he isn’t. I think a lot of people have questions about him, press or no press.

But that does not mean he will not win.

]]> By: TerryeL http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94647 TerryeL Tue, 27 May 2008 19:19:58 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94647 Jamie: I am hanging in there. Do not underestimate McCain or over estimate Obama. He might be hot stuff in California, but I live in one of those states where he could not beat Hillary, much less John McCain. Time will tell, but this guy should be further ahead right now than he is. And anything can happen. Jamie:

I am hanging in there. Do not underestimate McCain or over estimate Obama. He might be hot stuff in California, but I live in one of those states where he could not beat Hillary, much less John McCain.

Time will tell, but this guy should be further ahead right now than he is. And anything can happen.

]]> By: Lem http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94646 Lem Tue, 27 May 2008 17:08:43 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94646 Clearly you cannot say the guy was a lobbyist if he never registered. There is no Jack Abramoff here. The guy never registered. It's a Sopranos 'no show' ;) Clearly you cannot say the guy was a lobbyist if he never registered.

There is no Jack Abramoff here. The guy never registered.

It’s a Sopranos ‘no show’ ;)

]]> By: Lem http://pjmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94645 Lem Tue, 27 May 2008 16:36:06 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2008/05/26/is-obama-the-greatest-machine-politician-of-our-time/#comment-94645 So you telling me that the guy who runs the Obama campaign had a client lobby Obama two years ago and contribute to Obama almost a quarter of a million dollars? Naah, there is no story there ;) So you telling me that the guy who runs the Obama campaign had a client lobby Obama two years ago and contribute to Obama almost a quarter of a million dollars?

Naah, there is no story there ;)

]]>