Comments on: Did Vicki Iseman “Steal Honor” in THREE Presidential Elections?

By: BooRadley

BooRadley — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 05:38:53 +0000

Seconded.

By: phred

phred — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 14:19:09 +0000

There’s no doubt in my mind that the Rethug slime machine will work it’s usual magic. That will be to tamp down support of the Dem nominee, but it will do nothing to make the Rethug nominee more popular. Rep voters don’t like their field, and there isn’t a single Rethug (and I can’t even dream one up) sufficiently well liked by the various factions to mend their fractured party. You can’t have coattails without a coat. As it is, the Rethugs don’t even have a jacket.

By: prostratedragon

prostratedragon — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 06:54:49 +0000

Could that Sept renewal of the swiftboat campaign hold part of the answer, one way to deal with a tall opponent being to work on his legs? Ground being cleared for that?

By: prostratedragon

prostratedragon — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 06:45:15 +0000

And the beauty of this historical thread is that so far, at least, it does not seem to be “bipartisan,” as the K5 story is. Any Dems have such a well-placed and apparently effective minder from the vrwc crowd?

By: prostratedragon

prostratedragon — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 06:39:04 +0000

Oh geork yeah, that’s the paragraph that does it for me out of the whole brilliant article.

Goes some ways to the manipulation of our political process and public discourse.

By: freepatriot

freepatriot — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 04:36:33 +0000

best blogger EVER

4 NY Times “journalists” couldn’t figure it out

josh might have won an award, but he couldn’t carry your laptop

By: phred

phred — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:59:16 +0000

That’s the problem, MitWit just isn’t popular. I think the Rethugs could cope with losing the Presidency, but with the voter turnout what it has been so far, they will get creamed in Congressional seats as well. They are in dire need of finding someone who will inspire enough Repub voters to go to the polls to support Rethug Congresscritters in November. Thus far, they got no one. Not Freddy, not MitWit, not Huckleberry, no one. I can’t wait to see how they try to salvage this…

By: pollypat

pollypat — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:41:57 +0000

Did not Mitt Romney only suspend his campaign?

By: phred

phred — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:08:30 +0000

Interesting possibility. I have assumed that McCain’s capitulation on MCA came after a WH promise to back McCain’s candidacy in 2008. And I have assumed that all the bits of his soul that he has auctioned off since last summer have been sold to get the nomination.

I can’t help wondering if his obivious unpopularity with rank and file Republican voters is causing some panic in Rep inner circles about what appears to be shaping up as a massive loss of power in the fall. So now I’m wondering if this hit piece was essentially Rove et al. going back on their word to McCain. If so, then who will they install at the Convention? At the moment, they’ve got no one to replace McCain with.

By: pinson

pinson — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 19:55:29 +0000

Hmm, I think 1) is probably exactly right, but 2) seems more like some kind of double super-secret inverse gainer with a twist. Do you think Paxson and the Sinclair guys concern themselves with the political viability of specific politicians according to specific election cycles? In McCain’s case, maybe so, since he’s so difficult to work with. But really, immediate financial self interest among the wealthy is what drives the republican party and he was more or less playing along with their wishes. In Paxson’s case especially – all those plane rides – seems like he was more interested in getting McCain firmly into his pocket. If the Iseman relationship was something that Paxson held as a hammer, doesn’t it make sense for him to keep McCain around as long as possible to squeeze out all he can? Maybe not, and it’s all about keeping the path clear for W. Either way, I’m betting we’ll find out more soon.