Democratic Primary Exhaustion Thread

[we vs us]

I am now officially suffering from Primary fatigue.  After last night's fluffy back-and-forthing between Hillary and Obama, and ABC's transparent fetish for bull**** "character" issues, I'm ready not only for Pennsylvania to vote but for the convention to get here already.  

It's pretty obvious now that it isn't the candidates -- or the candidates' supporters -- who want this primary season to continue.  It's the MSM, who've decided to milk the conflict for as much cash as possible, and who're stoking the fires with "controversies" that reflect at worst, mis-steps, mis-statements, and mis-remembered history.

Does anyone need another Pastor Wright to make up their minds?  Does anyone need Bosnian snipers to help them decide? Can we seriously contend that this information makes deciding how to vote easier?

This primary has officially jumped the shark.  So sayeth Wevus.

/tired and rantish this morning.

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

I am now officially suffering from Primary fatigue.  After last night's fluffy back-and-forthing between Hillary and Obama, and ABC's transparent fetish for bull**** "character" issues, I'm ready not only for Pennsylvania to vote but for the convention to get here already.  

It's pretty obvious now that it isn't the candidates -- or the candidates' supporters -- who want this primary season to continue.  It's the MSM, who've decided to milk the conflict for as much cash as possible, and who're stoking the fires with "controversies" that reflect at worst, mis-steps, mis-statements, and mis-remembered history.

Does anyone need another Pastor Wright to make up their minds?  Does anyone need Bosnian snipers to help them decide? Can we seriously contend that this information makes deciding how to vote easier?

This primary has officially jumped the shark.  So sayeth Wevus.

/tired and rantish this morning.

Are you kidding me? It's just now gettin' good. Obama came off last night as expected, an empty suit that when he gets off message sounds like a blabbering moron. Hillary has shown us what I think we have known all along, willing to do or say anything to get elected. The democrats are eating themselves alive, which is really what this country has not seen since probably the 1980 primary season.

[Conan71]

Wevus,

I think voter turn-out will be very good come November, but voter turn-off will be at an all-time high.  

I don't think most voters will have much of a notion on issues, because the election cycle will have been approximately 22 months long at that point.  It's exhausting.  A lot of people are getting so disgusted with it, they are starting to tune it out.  

The deck was stacked heavily in Hillary's favor last night.  I mean you've got a former White House employee of her husband asking the questions.  I wondered about the placement of the candidates as well.  Anyone else notice that Obama was positioned to the left of Hillary?


Politics has become entertainment, we keep tuning in, so it sells advertising.  I hope candidates for 2112 will realize the disadvantages of running for nearly two years prior to an election.  I'm weary too, Wevus (but I have to say I am getting some pleasure in watching the cat-fight between HC and BO []).

[RecycleMichael]

I think we should pick elected officials with scratch-off lottery tickets. Winners could be president/governor/mayor for a day.

Might raise some money and the change could do us good.

[jne]

Anyone know a video stream of the debate?  I forgot to set the DVR.

[pmcalk]

That really was the worst debate ever.  Learned nothing substantive.  I guess ABC thought it needed some mindless entertainment to compete with American Idol and Big Brother.  Personally, I think we should vote for our presidents via text messaging.  Or maybe we can put them in the Whitehouse together, and vote one of them out each week.

[RecycleMichael]

I missed the debate, but the New York Times guy thinks it went well.

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/16/no-whining-about-the-media/index.html

No Whining About the Media
By David Brooks

Three quick points on the Democratic debate tonight:

First, Democrats, and especially Obama supporters, are going to jump all over ABC for the choice of topics: too many gaffe questions, not enough policy questions. I understand the complaints, but I thought the questions were excellent. The journalist's job is to make politicians uncomfortable, to explore evasions, contradictions and vulnerabilities. Almost every question tonight did that. The candidates each looked foolish at times, but that's their own fault.

We may not like it, but issues like Jeremiah Wright, flag lapels and the Tuzla airport will be important in the fall. Remember how George H.W. Bush toured flag factories to expose Michael Dukakis. It's legitimate to see how the candidates will respond to these sorts of symbolic issues.

The middle section of the debate, meanwhile, was stupendous. Those could be the most important 30 minutes of this entire campaign, for reasons I will explain in point two:
Second, Obama and Clinton were completely irresponsible. As the first President Bush discovered, it is simply irresponsible statesmanship (and stupid politics) to make blanket pledges to win votes. Both candidates did that on vital issues.

Both promised to not raise taxes on those making less than $200,000 or $250,000 a year. They both just emasculated their domestic programs. Returning the rich to their Clinton-era tax rates will yield, at best, $40 billion a year in revenue. It's impossible to fund a health care plan, let alone anything else, with that kind of money. The consequences are clear: if elected they will have to break their pledge, and thus destroy their credibility, or run a minimalist administration.

The second pledge was just as bad. Nobody knows what the situation in Iraq will be like. To pledge an automatic withdrawal is just insane. A mature politician would've been honest and said: I fully intend to withdraw, but I want to know what the reality is at that moment.
The third point concerns electability. The Democrats have a problem. All the signs point to a big Democratic year, and I still wouldn't bet against Obama winning the White House, but his background as a Hyde Park liberal is going to continue to dog him. No issue is crushing on its own, but it all adds up. For the life of me I can't figure out why he didn't have better answers on Wright and on the "bitter" comments. The superdelegates cannot have been comforted by his performance.

Final grades:

ABC: A
Clinton: B
Obama: D+

[waterboy]

Campaign year is like Olympics year. A huge profit making opportunity. Many of the best athletes don't even compete for lack of money or visibility, and the results of the judging are always politically tainted.

Wevus you are prescient. We are practically back where we started two years ago. The whole thing seems designed to build expectations up, then destroy them with glee.

A limit to one year for the whole process would be hugely popular.

[pmcalk]

From the Washingtonpost:

In Pa. Debate, the Clear Loser is ABC:

quote:At the end, Gibson pompously thanked the candidates -- or was he really patting himself on the back? -- for "what I think has been a fascinating debate." He's entitled to his opinion, but the most fascinating aspect was waiting to see how low he and Stephanopoulos would go, and then being appalled at the answer.

I found it a total waste of time.  Obviously, I am an Obama supporter, but I found the questions of Clinton's Bosnia story just as unnecessary.  And the question about the two on the same ticket has already been asked.  Ultimately, I am sure people who had already chosen a candidate heard only what they wanted to hear, and those who were undecided heard nothing substantive.

The New York Times has an interesting article, explaining how we view these sorts of debates:

quote:If you're a Democrat, your candidate won in Wednesday night's presidential debate — that was obvious, and most neutral observers would recognize that. But the other candidate issued appalling distortions, and the news commentary afterward was shamefully biased.

So you're madder than ever at the other candidate. You may even be more likely to vote for John McCain if your candidate loses.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/17/opinion/17kristof.html?ref=opinion

[FOTD]

Hillary Citton was not wearing a flag lapel pin last night, yet no questions about her patriotism. Isn't that interesting.

Is it because Obama has the "funny name"? Or the false rumors about his religion?

Flag pins and patriotism -- relevant to all the candidates or just Barack Obama?

[pmcalk]

For those who missed the debate, here's a good summary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eP-8zX7Yno

[jne]

Here's the whole thing with a great 'jump to' feature:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/04/16/us/politics/20080416_DEBATE_GRAPHIC.html#video

[Hometown]

Campbell Brown covered Texas Polygamy last night.  My partner and I missed the debate completely.  Didn't even remember it was on.  Hillary said Obama can win.  I guess we have just about exhausted all the fight left in us.  Has Hillary named Obama her running mate yet?  Wake me when they're in the White House.

[FOTD]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/16/abc-hosts-heckled-after-d_n_97124.html

ABC Hosts Heckled After Debate: "The Crowd Is Turning On Me"

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/DemocraticDebate/comments?type=story&id=4666956

"...Asinine questions - abysmal debate. Fire these silly moderators NOW. They insult the intelligence of the American people."

SNAP!

[iplaw]

Gasp!  O supporters were pissed off at the moderators last night.  If I was O I'd be pissed off too.  How DARE they expect me to answer direct questions and then demand an answer when I don't give a response that's on point!

If he can't handle what he got last night I feel sorry for him when he's really under fire.

At least the Clinton camp doesn't go around pissing and moaning about how dey witty feewings were hurt last night.