-
I thought it was still a Democratic administration in 1999... Gosh, my mind is sure playing tricks on me!
For an apples-to-apples comparison:
DJIA
The day before GWB's inauguration, and yesterday:
January 19, 2001: 10587.59
June 26, 2008: 11453.42
The day before Clinton's inauguration, and after the same amount of time had gone by in his administration:
January 19, 1993: 3255.99
June 26, 2000: 10542.99Of course, much of this was driven by the Internet boom, so it's partially attributable to Gore :-)
Posted at June 27, 2008 3:12 AM in response to Nine Years of Economic Progress
-
Obama has a lot more to gain from the Clintons, at this point, than the Clintons have to gain from Obama. This gives the Clintons a certain degree of (additional) power. As with any advantage, the Clintons - being intelligent, ambitious people - will use it to improve their situation. Could you honestly expect anything different? :-)
Posted at June 27, 2008 2:53 AM in response to Why Should Obama Apoligize to Bill and Hillary?
-
I never thought it was about the oil... I thought it was about the defense contracting. Ah, well.
Posted at June 19, 2008 10:44 PM in response to Always just out of reach
-
Actually, I appreciated Greg's analysis.
It was purely anecdotal, with no consideration given (as Greg notes in his post) to determine whether other candidates were treated in the same way... I'm not sure I'd characterize that as "analysis." :-)Posted at June 17, 2008 2:55 AM in response to Are you as fed up with TPM as I?
-
Well, sure, that's the way it is now. Before Mr. Crankypants travelled back to 1928, it was as he describes.
Posted at June 8, 2008 6:10 PM in response to I Tire of Correcting You
-
But it is fundamentally a undemocratic process.
But then what is a "fundamentally democratic" process? Having a large number of uninformed voters who've been spoon-fed opinions by mass media and never bothered to have an intelligent conversation with their neighbors about their choices?Posted at June 7, 2008 2:18 AM in response to Ideas for Reforming Democratic Nomination Process
-
"But why does she need BIG DONORS at her concession speech?"
Presumably, to help her retire her campaign debt. As an enticement to her to work hard to unite the party.
I'm concerned, too, but hoping for the best, and believing in her to ultimately do what she knows needs to be done to help the party in the General Election.
Posted at June 2, 2008 5:23 PM in response to Two Concerns: Why ask Big Donors To Come to NY and Why Did Obama say They'd Work Together in Nov?
-
Hillary understands completely that we are living in 2008 and not 1968; she wouldn't have been able to run as successfully as she has in 1968. Don't confuse some of her most vocal, frustrated partisans with Hillary herself. As an Obama supporter, I sure don't want to be equated to someone who calls Hillary "the antichrist bitch."
Posted at June 2, 2008 5:19 PM in response to Psycho Old White Women Elect McCain
-
Ahem... The previous comment was intended to be a reply to Indiex.
Posted at June 2, 2008 4:55 PM in response to Understanding the Clintonista mindset at this point
-
First, you're badly misquoting Michelle. She never said she'd have to think long and hard about _voting_ for Clinton, she said she'd have to think (_not_ "long and hard") about _working_ to support Clinton. She followed up immediately by saying that everyone in the Democratic party will work to support the nominee. See http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/02/04/michelle_obama/
You've also misquoted Barack, taking his comment out of context and re-wording it to be more inflammatory. In context, it's hard to see how Obama's (mis)quote above is offensive: His point was that Hillary was stronger among Democrats, and he suspected that these Democrats would vote for the Democratic Party nominee in November; in contrast, Obama was stronger at the time among independents, who might or might not vote for a Democrat in the General Election.
From http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/02/01/629273.aspx:
Obama and McCain both attract a large number of Independents, while Clinton is stronger among Democrats than Independents. Using Nevada as an example, Obama said while Clinton did well in Clark County where traditional Democrats reside, he did well in Elko, a place without traditional Democratic votes.
"I am confident I will get her votes if I'm the nominee," Obama stressed. "It's not clear she would get the votes I got if she were the nominee."Clinton has said much more inflammatory things during the course of her campaign, I'd wager... Yet, unlike with the Obamas, you don't seem to be holding the media soundbites of those misfires against her...
Posted at June 2, 2008 4:54 PM in response to Understanding the Clintonista mindset at this point
