I am a fine one to talk posting as I do under a handle of my own about politics. If I thought there was something intrinsically wrong with a nom de plume I obviously would not be doing it myself. What I think is wrong is to take a name and abandon it. A handle, an anonymous identity, should be a way of showing an aspect of yourself to the world. Especially when it would harm you in the rest of your life.
Where it goes over the edge is if you use the identities, if you are posting under multiple names, to be your own chorus or to abandon a name as soon as someone challenges you.
And a name should be a name rather than a title. If you have to put "patriot" or "rules" in your name, you aren't or don't. That's what I've got to say for now.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Udall Ahead, but Not Winning Yet
I would love to say that Mark Udall is doing well. The thing is that even though polls show him with a fairly consistent 5% lead over Bob Schaffer he has yet to reach a consistent 50%. This means that he is still vulnerable because around 15% of the electorate is still undecided and that number is actually higher now than it was six months ago.
Lest you think this is a Colorado thing check out the aggregate polling for John McCain vs. Barack Obama in Colorado. Six months ago the undecided percentage in Colorado was approximately 6% and now it is is about 3%. The overall lower percentage is a function of the exposure of the presidential race vs. the senate race in the state. But the fact that the percentages are going in opposite directions is very significant.
Do not take this the wrong way. This is not me spinning the numbers to make it more favorable to former congressman Schaffer. The Republican brand is deeply unpopular this year due to the state of the economy and the behavior of the Bush administration. And this will probably mean that Udall wins in the end. However, the numbers make clear that he is a lackluster candidate. He just happens to be a lackluster Democratic candidate who's a little bit better than the lackluster Republican.
I think this is not because of his liberalism, which is not terribly strong, but because he is neither an inspiring speaker or a good advocate for his causes. He is cast from the mold of the typical Democrat running for statewide office in Colorado in the last decade. They are hungry to win so they put up mildly competent candidates who have the right credentials who look good in comparison with the doctrinaire Republicans with a whiff of corruption about them. The only reason these Democrats win is because Republicans have become so bad. There is nothing in the organization or ideas that would predict positive "we have better ideas" wins for the Democrats, it is all because the Republican party has been subverted by the 'anti-government'/anti-intellectual zealots and people who'll mouth the rhetoric of the same to win.
When the Republican party starts rebuilding and expelling its crooks and Focus on the Family crusaders will start the countdown to the end of Democrats holding the balance of power in this state.
Lest you think this is a Colorado thing check out the aggregate polling for John McCain vs. Barack Obama in Colorado. Six months ago the undecided percentage in Colorado was approximately 6% and now it is is about 3%. The overall lower percentage is a function of the exposure of the presidential race vs. the senate race in the state. But the fact that the percentages are going in opposite directions is very significant.
Do not take this the wrong way. This is not me spinning the numbers to make it more favorable to former congressman Schaffer. The Republican brand is deeply unpopular this year due to the state of the economy and the behavior of the Bush administration. And this will probably mean that Udall wins in the end. However, the numbers make clear that he is a lackluster candidate. He just happens to be a lackluster Democratic candidate who's a little bit better than the lackluster Republican.
I think this is not because of his liberalism, which is not terribly strong, but because he is neither an inspiring speaker or a good advocate for his causes. He is cast from the mold of the typical Democrat running for statewide office in Colorado in the last decade. They are hungry to win so they put up mildly competent candidates who have the right credentials who look good in comparison with the doctrinaire Republicans with a whiff of corruption about them. The only reason these Democrats win is because Republicans have become so bad. There is nothing in the organization or ideas that would predict positive "we have better ideas" wins for the Democrats, it is all because the Republican party has been subverted by the 'anti-government'/anti-intellectual zealots and people who'll mouth the rhetoric of the same to win.
When the Republican party starts rebuilding and expelling its crooks and Focus on the Family crusaders will start the countdown to the end of Democrats holding the balance of power in this state.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)