MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
|
|
|
From the Readers
- barefooted 9 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 10 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 12 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
Creative corner
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
From the Dagbloggers
- Michael Wolraich 11 months 3 weeks ago
- Danny Cardwell 3 years 2 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 3 years 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 1 month ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 1 month ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 1 month ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 1 month ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 2 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 2 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 months ago
Rick Perry beats Obama for first time in poll Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/09/02/123016/texas-rick-perry-beats-obama-for.html#ixzz1Wy2lFstV
By miguelitoh2o on Sun, 09/04/2011 - 3:48am |I have less faith in Rasmussen's ability to design an unbiased poll than just about any of the big polling cos, but this poll herald's what the White House has on its plate for 2012.
For the first time, Texas Gov. Rick Perry leads President Barack Obama in a national poll, by 44 to 41 percent, while his GOP rivals trail in head-to-head match-ups against the president.
The new Rasmussen poll signals a breakthrough for Perry, who trailed Obama by 3 percentage points in last week's Rasmussen poll. The latest survey of 1,000 likely voters, released Thursday, was conducted Aug. 23-30 and has an error margin of 3 percentage points.
URL:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/09/02/123016/texas-rick-perry-beats-obama-for.html
- Add new comment
- 4292 reads
Comments
Perry can win. He's got enough appeal to both the right wing and the Republican establishment to capture the nomination. I'd like to think that his negatives will turn off the independents, but I doubt it. Short of an economic recovery or a campaign implosion, my bet is on him. If enough Republicans ride his coattails into the Senate, we're in for some serious shit starting in 2012. He'll make Bush Jr. look like a moderate.
by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 09/05/2011 - 1:29am
That about sums it up. And it only reinforces the data on political ideology in the country -- liberals only make up about 20%. The conservative and moderates, whether they identify as Republican, Democrat, or Independent, decide the elections. The liberals need to band with the moderates and quick.
by Elusive Trope on Mon, 09/05/2011 - 1:59am
by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 09/05/2011 - 2:28am
I don't know who these unrecruited liberals are. There are of course the vast number of the poor who do not vote, but who through sheer self-interest if nothing else, would gravitate to the liberal agenda. But to the extent they represent the politically unengaged, I don't see much progress in this arena.
And at this point I'm not looking to reverse the tide, but just to hold the line. In a Perry vs. Obama race, there is some hope this is possible.
by Elusive Trope on Mon, 09/05/2011 - 2:49am
Your political strategy suffers from a surfeit of fatalism. Had past reformers subscribed to it, no change would have ever taken place.
If you judge the possibilities by the current engaged and currently progressive, you will never see any opportunity. The point is to engage people who are currently unengaged (get them excited, angry, determined) and to persuade people who are currently unpersuaded (including many working class people who have been attracted by the right).
How to do that is the rub, of course. But if you start from the pessimistic position that no one who is not already an engaged progressive can become an engaged progressive, you resign yourself to an endless losing struggle to "hold the line."
PS Obama's election will not be determined by how moderate he is (he's already damned moderate) but by his ability to convince people that he can fix the economy better than his opponent can.
by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 09/05/2011 - 11:35am
You're being unreasonable, Genghis.
by Verified Atheist on Mon, 09/05/2011 - 11:37am
Shh! Don't let it get around.
PS Nice quote
by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 09/05/2011 - 4:44pm
of course, the quote can also be applied to all the tea party protesters. so is progress is something we should embrace unconditionally?
by Elusive Trope on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 5:43am
I would argue that, based on my definition of the word "progress", that the quote cannot be applied to the tea party protesters. Most of them would probably agree, as what they're wanting is to return to the mythical good ol' times. That said, it's true that one could substitute the word "change" for "progress" in the quote and it would still be true. However, the point of the quote (to me, at least) isn't to embrace unreasonableness per se, but rather to point out its necessity as a means to an end. As an analogy, fire is necessary for modern civilization, but it can also be very destructive.
That said, I'm afraid that I'm personally every bit as "reasonable" as you are.
by Verified Atheist on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 6:29am
Although I don't really believe this is happening, it'd be fun to game the system a bit, wouldn't it? I mean, if we all said we planned on voting for the worse possible Republican candidate, that might give him/her a boost in the primaries. Of course, on the other hand, if the economy gets even worse than it currently is, we might end up stuck with whoever wins the Republican primaries, so…
by Verified Atheist on Mon, 09/05/2011 - 11:35am
The Tea Party rejects the old Republican Party represented by Bush, the previous governor of Texas. The current governor of Texas is seen as a refreshing and bold break from the past! Ironic is it not!
by NCD on Mon, 09/05/2011 - 4:19pm
Against the kumbaya president, they'll win.
Can't we all just get along?
http://www.truth-out.org/goodbye-all-reflections-gop-operative-who-left-cult/1314907779
by Resistance on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 4:23am
Then there's that "Perry used to be a Democrat" thing. Seems to me that would appeal to voters who lean towards the center. A Republican who knows how to talk to Democrats.
Last week I caught an extended interview with Perry on PBS, if I recall the network correctly, and he sounded so damned reasonable. I found myself saying out loud, "Oh. Shit. There's gonna be some trouble with this guy."
If the election were held today, well, I don't know if people would exactly vote for Perry, but I would reckon they wouldn't mind voting against Obama simply because people vote their pocketbook....it's an old saying that has held its meaning. People more often know what they don't like better than what they do like and people don't like not having job opportunities.
by wabby on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 8:08am
Just wanted to note here a few days after the fact that in my comment above I have proved myself to be full of sh*t. It wasn't Perry I saw interviewed. It was Huntsman.
Republicans all look alike to me.
by wabby on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 9:44am
I have to admit I was surprised to hear you describe Perry as sounding reasonable, but not having seen the clip, I'd just chalked it up to him applying some sort of veneer. Huntsman, however, is reasonable, at least by comparison.
by Verified Atheist on Thu, 09/08/2011 - 9:57am
Don't waste your time refuting me, just setting out my view because it happens not to have been stated already.
Obama will defeat Perry on personal rather than fundamental issues.
Swing voter concern about Perry's retrograde views on abortion, gays, evolution and global warming will combine with latent affection if not approval for Obama resurrected by a two-guns-blazing Perry campaign.
However frustrating Obama's mugwumpery (you can look it up) it's left him as a still conceivable choice on the other side of the fence.
A corollary of my view is that we can forget about hoping for emergence of a "fighting Barack" candidate during the next 14 months. It won't pass any legislation and merely peel off some of the wump siders.
by Flavius on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 12:17pm
I'm not gonna refute you flavius. I happen to think you're right. I also think the Dems will be able to spin the fact that Perry became a multimillionaire while holding public office in their favor. And I'm very familiar with Burrough's, so I won't bother googling mugwumps. ;)
by miguelitoh2o on Tue, 09/06/2011 - 11:16pm