(Paraphrasing Paul Reiser in BEVERLY HILLS COP)

"This isn't my {reality}"

:D

Kinda hard to capture the nuance with such a short line but if you recall the movie and that part, trust me.... It's really funny.. :D

Michale.....

Honestly - I've always thought that the Republican party did a great job adapting post-Nixon in the terms of the debate and persuading the masses. What changed? W. I think we may be seeing a case, not unlike the Clintons, where the Republican party is stuck in the late 90's. They were able to ride the wave of fear in 2002 and 2004, nationally - but locally all they had were ripples. We might be in one of those "changing time" where we will see small groups of dedicated party members of both parties switch to the other side over the next couple of years.

This happened during the civil war, WWI, WWII, Vietnam and - to some extent - with Reagan Democrats. Perhaps the catalyst is a country in 'war' and economic shifts that create these new alignments that then alter party structure for the future.

Obviously, the rules of time and space have folded in upon themselves for you and I to agree! ha! ;)

T

That sounds like the best solution possible.

But I doubt Hillary will go for it. Because it would resolve the whole issue and give Hillary absolutely NOTHING to hang her hat on, insofar as staying in the race is concerned...

Michale.....

Heck, I'd be happy with full seating of FL and MI as long as Obama gets the "uncommitted" delegates (since only he and Edwards would have gotten delegates from MI) and he also gets Edwards delegates in FL. AS LONG AS THE SUPERS GET NO VOTE FROM MI AND FL. Don't punish the voters, punish the leaders.

What I found is that the more I paid attention, the more I couldn’t stand the Republican Party. The reason for that wasn’t so much on policy positions but on the integrity of the individuals discussing the policies. Sure, I disagreed with many of the policies, but I also disagree with a lot of the Democrats on policies. But the biggest thing to get me to see myself as a Democrat was the personal integrity of the Republican politicians, pundits, and right leaning media outlets. It seems like every time I watched one of them my BS meter would go off. Spin is one thing, but so many were just out right lying.

It seemed like so many Republicans were adopting the stage presence of a televangelist. They would shout their positions and make ridiculous arguments. Everything out of their mouths would be either disingenuous or deceitful. Many adopted this façade full time. Occasionally you’d see them drop the façade and make rational, logical arguments. Pat Buchanan and Joe Scarborough are perfect examples of those that slip in and out of this façade. Pat will rant, rave, and scream his ridiculous arguments over and over, but every so often he’ll tone it down and give a very reasonable rational commentary. Even if I don’t agree with his opinion, I can see his side of it in those cases.

This is the problem I see with the GOP this year. Too many of them have whole heartedly put on this mask of being a televangelist or radio talk show host, that they’ve lost their integrity and decency. I can disagree with someone’s point of view but still see things from their perspective. But when they act like raving lunatics, phonies, or hypocrites there isn’t even a desire or willingness to try to see their point of view.

The GOP needs to get back their integrity back by giving rational and logical arguments for their positions. They need to drop the bombastic rhetoric and the low class attack tactics they’ve employed to try and push their agenda. Individuals like Ed Rollins, Chuck Hagel, Michael Smerconish, and a few others are Republicans that I will happily listen to in order to get a different perspective on issues. They give rational, logical arguments for their positions. If the GOP stopped with the constant act of being like Rush or Sean Hannity, and would just be normal people with honest views on how they see things, they wouldn’t have the problem that they do. But it seems they saw how Karl Rove got GWB elected twice, so they’ve adopted that way of thinking. The problem for them is that the country adapted faster.

-Brian

Well, looks like I underestimated the winner in both states by about 5%. Obama's holding his 16-point OR lead as I go to bed, meaning I was off in both races by about the same amount. Go figure. But two more correct races for the books! Looks like I'll close the season for both parties at between "7 in 10" and "3 in 4" right. Not too shabby... although I am embarassed that I called more Republican contests correctly than Democratic ones....

As for your link, Dean's numbers are a bit off. Almost 600 of 800 superdelegates have now announced.

Oh, wait a minute, this is almost a month old.

Interestingly, on one of the recent Sunday talk shows, McAuliffe (it was Press The Meat... oh, excuse me, Meet The Press...) was confronted with his own words in his book (back when he was in Howard Dean's current job) and admitted that he'd be perfectly happy now if only HALF the Michigan and Florida delegates were seated at the convention. I can dig up a transcript link if you're interested... I was a bit surprised it wasn't a bigger story in the campaign coverage, personally.

-CW

BTW - I just found this (I don't read everything all the time) http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/4/28/1946/48611
"McAuliffe Adopts June 15th as Deadline for Superdelegate Endorsements?"

T

I was a bit off in KY, but got the gist of it right. KY has very similar demographics to WV. Ohio is a lot different in population makeup and geographical makeup. That's why I pegged it close to WV...

Fifteen minutes until OR polls close!

And after that, only three more until it's over...

-CW

But I am also right about KY in terms of the Republican Primary. McCain has 72.5% - Huckabee with 8.3% and Paul with 6.8%.

Huckabee endorsed McCain - and yet he will pull about 8-11% in tonight's KY Republican primary. And Paul will pull a few, too. In fact, I will estimate that McCain barely breaks 75% in the Republican primary.

So, Edwards endorsement will help a little - that's why I knocked about 2% off Edwards pull in WV. But there will still be hold-outs, in my opinion. And this hurts Clinton more than Obama, because in states like KY and WV, Edwards people are more likely to go to Clinton than Obama.

This being likely, what does that do to the delegate count??

Michale

@Chris -
BTW - I am updating my estimate in KY. Edwards IS still on the ballot there. I'm going with 6% for Edwards, 37 Obama, 57 Clinton.

I can't believe that the Democratic Party is not spinning in it's grave over that..

Michale.....

Kentucky Clinton by 26%
Oregon Obama by 13%

Due to the turnout - I'll say that Clinton wins both states by less than 40,000 votes (which is what he'll cancel out on June 3 with MT and SD).

That being the case, I won't begrudge the Left their "gloating" in the POSSIBLE demise of the GOP..

I'll simply point out that, as bad as it is for the GOP this election, it's nothing compared to the damage that is being inflicted on the Democratic Party from within...

It's really kind of funny..

On the one hand, we are served up very logical and rational reasons why McCain can't POSSIBLY win the General Election.

In the next instance, we are shown logical and convincing evidence that the Democratic Party is about to implode and there is NO WAY that they can produce a viable candidate...

It's pretty sad that this election will be decided by which party fracks up less....

Why don't we just cancel the '08 election, everyone run their own lives for the next 4 years and we just try it again in '12, eh?? :D

Michale.....