Nobel Prize-winning economist and NYT columnist Paul Krugman is in a unique position to influence the conversation on the next administration's fiscal and economic policies.
Here he is advocating a gigantic stimulus package on a scale of the national mobilization of World War II.
Showing posts with label Hardball. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hardball. Show all posts
Dec 4, 2008
Aug 25, 2008
MSNBC's Chuck Todd: Wisconsin Was Turning Point
Chuck Todd, top media politico, just said on MSNBC's Hardball that Wisconsin was the turning point in the 2008 Democratic primary.
Todd said that after Obama clobbered Hillary in Wisconsin on February 19, Hillary had only a 10 percent chance of getting the nomination, and not the 50 percent chance that Hillary's people and the media proclaimed.
Obama's Wisconsin victory, gained on the heels of his sweep in Virginia, Maryland and D.C. the week before, left many objective observers looking to Ohio and Pennsylvania (where Hillary won solid victories) as merely prolonging the inevitable Obama nomination.
Salon had a piece by Mike Madden in early May explaining the importance of Wisconsin's primary and probing why this perfectly composed demographic state for Hillary handed her a 17-point thrashing.
See also Wisconsin More Important than Pennsylvania Machine-State.
Todd said that after Obama clobbered Hillary in Wisconsin on February 19, Hillary had only a 10 percent chance of getting the nomination, and not the 50 percent chance that Hillary's people and the media proclaimed.
Obama's Wisconsin victory, gained on the heels of his sweep in Virginia, Maryland and D.C. the week before, left many objective observers looking to Ohio and Pennsylvania (where Hillary won solid victories) as merely prolonging the inevitable Obama nomination.
Salon had a piece by Mike Madden in early May explaining the importance of Wisconsin's primary and probing why this perfectly composed demographic state for Hillary handed her a 17-point thrashing.
See also Wisconsin More Important than Pennsylvania Machine-State.
Apr 24, 2008
Wisconsin More Important than Pennsylvania Machine-State
Updated - An afterthought on Pennsylvania.
Pennsylvania is a quasi-Democratic machine state. Thus one expected the machine-backed candidate, Hillary Clinton, to do well with the most established demographics there: Whites and older citizens.
No doubt then that Hillary's expected win on Tuesday (nine points) and her turning-the-tide spin generated a round of media ridicule and explicit reference to the Pennsylvania machine-state status, minimizing the significance of the Clinton victory. Not what happened.
As Chuck Todd: (Hardball, April 7) had put it, "...Pennsylvania is a machine state. You know it‘s a machine democratic state. It is an old school machine state and she has the entire machine behind her, other than the Casey family. She‘s got the state party officially behind her."
The media's reaction, including Chris Matthews and Norah O‘Donnell, who know better, is to exclaim that Hillary did well with whites and older citizens, from which is extrapolated "huge" significance and alarm about how well Obama can perform with whites in a general election.
So why is Pennsylvania, which votes reliably Democratic in general elections in part owing to the effectiveness of the Democratic machine, more significant than Wisconsin (Feb. 19), which votes narrowly Democratic in general elections? It's not.
In Wisconsin, Obama brought out 10,000s of politically casual voters who didn't even show up at the polls six weeks later in a historic, high-profile Supreme Court race; and Obama clobbered Hillary in February, prevailing "by a wide margin among men, 67-31 percent. (His win among white men, 63-34 percent, was surpassed only in Utah)." (ABC News)
See also For Obama, a Struggle to Win Over Key Blocs (NYT, April 26) in which Adam Nagourney asks ,"Why has (Obama) been unable to win over enough working-class and white voters to wrap up the Democratic nomination?"
Like Obama did in Wisconsin and the other 29 states in which he won, Nagourney could have added, though that would have had the effect of killing his story.
Hillary is desperate to pretend the race is still on; and the corporate talking heads and political media are desperate to engage Hillary's pretension.
One last note on the exit polling from Pennsylvania, pertaining to Hillary and blacks.
Blacks: 92-Obama - 8-Hillary.
Questions worth pursuing: Why is Hillary doing so horribly among blacks? And using the same primary-general election demographic logic applied to Obama, what does this mean for a prospective Hillary nomination and her performance in the general election? Can Hillary win without black support?
Pennsylvania is a quasi-Democratic machine state. Thus one expected the machine-backed candidate, Hillary Clinton, to do well with the most established demographics there: Whites and older citizens.
No doubt then that Hillary's expected win on Tuesday (nine points) and her turning-the-tide spin generated a round of media ridicule and explicit reference to the Pennsylvania machine-state status, minimizing the significance of the Clinton victory. Not what happened.
As Chuck Todd: (Hardball, April 7) had put it, "...Pennsylvania is a machine state. You know it‘s a machine democratic state. It is an old school machine state and she has the entire machine behind her, other than the Casey family. She‘s got the state party officially behind her."
The media's reaction, including Chris Matthews and Norah O‘Donnell, who know better, is to exclaim that Hillary did well with whites and older citizens, from which is extrapolated "huge" significance and alarm about how well Obama can perform with whites in a general election.
So why is Pennsylvania, which votes reliably Democratic in general elections in part owing to the effectiveness of the Democratic machine, more significant than Wisconsin (Feb. 19), which votes narrowly Democratic in general elections? It's not.
In Wisconsin, Obama brought out 10,000s of politically casual voters who didn't even show up at the polls six weeks later in a historic, high-profile Supreme Court race; and Obama clobbered Hillary in February, prevailing "by a wide margin among men, 67-31 percent. (His win among white men, 63-34 percent, was surpassed only in Utah)." (ABC News)
See also For Obama, a Struggle to Win Over Key Blocs (NYT, April 26) in which Adam Nagourney asks ,"Why has (Obama) been unable to win over enough working-class and white voters to wrap up the Democratic nomination?"
Like Obama did in Wisconsin and the other 29 states in which he won, Nagourney could have added, though that would have had the effect of killing his story.
Hillary is desperate to pretend the race is still on; and the corporate talking heads and political media are desperate to engage Hillary's pretension.
One last note on the exit polling from Pennsylvania, pertaining to Hillary and blacks.
Blacks: 92-Obama - 8-Hillary.
Questions worth pursuing: Why is Hillary doing so horribly among blacks? And using the same primary-general election demographic logic applied to Obama, what does this mean for a prospective Hillary nomination and her performance in the general election? Can Hillary win without black support?
Feb 15, 2008
Hardball: If Clinton Loses Wisc Big, Something's Broken
Just watching MSNBC's Harball for a few minutes.
A guest (missed his name) said that if Hillary were to lose Wisconsin big, with its on-paper pro-Hillary demographics, then something is broken in Hillary's campaign appeal.
That sounds right.
#
A guest (missed his name) said that if Hillary were to lose Wisconsin big, with its on-paper pro-Hillary demographics, then something is broken in Hillary's campaign appeal.
That sounds right.
#
Aug 21, 2007
Civil liberties are in jeopardy — ‘it happened to us.’
Via ThinkProgress
Civil liberties are in jeopardy — ‘it happened to us.’
After being arrested, but not charged, on July 4, 2004 for wearing anti-Bush t-shirts at a rally for President Bush, Nicole and Jeffrey Rank of Corpus Christie, TX sued the federal government. Last week, they settled with the government for $80,000.
The Ranks appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball last night, arguing that “civil liberties continue to be in jeopardy” and that they “didn’t realize it until it happened to us.” Crooks and Liars has the video here.
###
Civil liberties are in jeopardy — ‘it happened to us.’
After being arrested, but not charged, on July 4, 2004 for wearing anti-Bush t-shirts at a rally for President Bush, Nicole and Jeffrey Rank of Corpus Christie, TX sued the federal government. Last week, they settled with the government for $80,000.
The Ranks appeared on MSNBC’s Hardball last night, arguing that “civil liberties continue to be in jeopardy” and that they “didn’t realize it until it happened to us.” Crooks and Liars has the video here.
###
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)