U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
November 01, 2008 07:31 PM UTC
103 Comments
Shooting the messenger.
They should also both run ahead of the “yes” vote on A-48, demonstrating the wisdom of the Crown Jewel’s strategy of having his candidate oppose that measure.
n/t
Other than that, the only good news for you ‘pubs is that you might be rid of Murtha, although that’s probably going to run counter to your agenda in the long term.
Yes. Aren’t you forgetting Dan Quale?
Leading a wave of well known Republicans, Colin Powell is a true “maverick”…along with Reagan’s Chief of Staff, Ken Duberstein …They vote their conscience
especially before the UN. After that, who cares what he thinks?
They must be looking forward to that.
…McCain still has a decent shot at winning Colorado. And he has a less-than-decent, but nonetheless an existing, shot at winning the White House. He’s made PA more competitive than anyone would’ve guessed.
Anyhoo, my guess is that, if McCain wins the White House, most Repubs would label 2008 a success.
A decent chance? What are you calling a decent chance? Because looking at the polling I see one extremely narrow scenario for McCain to win.
Right now Obama has about 264 electoral votes that are a certain as polling can be will go to him. This means that McCain must not only win all the tossups (Florida, Indiana, Missouri, North Carolina, and Georgia), but must take all the close blue leaning states as well (Colorado, Nevada, Ohio, and Virginia). If he loses even one of those nine states the best he can do is a tie.
And Pennsylvania is competitive? Says who? I see no polls on Pollster.com right now that show the race with less than a +4 lead for Obama. And the most recent shows a +8.
And to just put it in perspective, right now Colorado is about as likely to go for McCain as Arizona is to go for Obama. No, really. The polling is showing similar spreads in both states.
…I didn’t say McCain had a decent chance to win the White House. On the contrary, I said he had a “less-than-decent” chance.
And I didn’t say that PA was competitive in an absolute sense. I said it was “more competitive” than anyone would’ve guessed.
Thank you for your attention to these matters.
Ambiguous writing is the fault of the writer, not the reader.
except the truly delusional Drudge fans.
In 2004, everybody knew Pennsylvania would vote for Kerry, yet the polls had PA in the margin of error. Today almost all polls give Obama at least a 7 point and up to a 12 point lead.
As a Pennsylvanian, I promise you the Democrats will win it, no matter what McCain tries to do in the state. I’ll bet you a six-pack.
or Iron City sxp ?
he meant because of flipping voting machines. My bad.
at proving the term “Boulder Liberal” scares no one. Unfortunately that was the only thing they ran on for this senate race. Change is merely the recognition that past patterns no longer work.
Wadhams. This state and the Country have passed you by while you have messed around in South Dakota, Washington and Virginia. See ya. Bet you get fired within two weeks after the election. Great plan Dick.
After having done another stupid thing with another pretty-boy of the right-wing, you’ve now emboldened Udall to be as liberal as he wants to be, which will be a hell of a lot more liberal than Salazar.
Way to go!
By the way, do you think there will be any gains in the legislature? Hell, you might even lose a few seats there.
Please sell you house and move to somewhere where people might appreciate your non-talent – say backwater Mississippi. I’m sure the Governor there can give you a hand up.
It was never really D to begin with. The only reason is because Debbie Stafford switched to Democrats mid-term. But the Dems could pick off a couple more seats in the State House and SD 23 in the Senate.
That they can reclaim Debbie Stafford’s seat after driving her from the party?
You gotta spin something. Might as well be that. 😉
ferocious reputation in 2010 running Tancredo’s gubernatorial campaign (winky wink). Liberals are just shaking their heads at what 15 million dollars in negative advertising achieved against them. Being conservative means you don’t change how you do things because eventually things will change so that what your doing works again. Until then keep up using those 60’s hatred and 80’s slogans. Wouldn’t want to disappoint Saint Ronnie with heretical thoughts about Voodoo Reaganomics.
Coffman is going to win his first election here.
Lamborn is going to win again.
If this is your good news, then I’ve got a great piece of property to sell you in the Arizona desert.
I’m not saying that’s success– just that it’s as good as it gets in CO this year.
Elsewhere- Senator Stevens may not go to prison.
Martin may force Chambliss into a runoff- but Chambliss should hang on.
Dole may not get blown out.
Jeb Bush hasn’t done anything to negatively impact his reputation.
Governor Crist solidified his rep by extending the early voting hours.
I don’t consider myself a “beleagured Republican” – but I thought it was more of an invite for free for all comment.
Nearly every home had multiple Schaffer signs. I saw the Karen Wilde (HD-40, Democrat) people out waving signs today (And I think I saw the candidate too, but I’m not sure. It was certainly one of the people with the government official name tags) and the Obama office looked busy as I drove out to my parents’ house, but other than that it was deep red country. Though only for the top of the ticket and county commissioners, I did not see any signs for Cindy Acree or Karen Wilde planted in front of homes.
I don’t buy the “nonpartisan analyst” schtick, but there’s no arguing that the GOP under The Wad has provided ludicrous amounts of grist this cycle. The GOP’ers don’t have a lot of oxygen here.
I think you need a good and consistent GOP writer to balance David’s stuff. I think Haners has front-page permission, but he rarely posts and he’s not a particularly good writer. You could definitely open up the community more if you had a really strong and incisive Republican writing on the front page. (At this point, I don’t know where you’d find one who wasn’t a thoroughly mad GOP kool-aid drinker.) That’s definitely missing right now, and would make the site more interesting. Just a thought.
But I might not be eligible because of my heretical stance in this year’s election.
Something I’d love to hear commented about, is whether most of you here really believe that you’ll have another election where just not being associated with George Bush is going to be good enough to win at so many levels, State and national.
Very quickly with a supermajority “change” turns from your friend to your enemy. This ass kicking should be broad enough to remove any excuses about Republican interference, etc., and those of us who haven’t pimped ourselves out to ‘values voters’ will still be here with a pretty poignant message of less government, lower taxes, individual liberties, and strong defense. And it will be unencumbered by the old corrupt hateful brand of GOP that is going the way of the Dodo bird on November 4th.
Here are some examples of little things that could turn the public against the Dems very quickly:
A major terrorist attack/natural disaster that’s not handled decisively.
Now before anyone has a chance to say a whisper about Bush, remember, he and his record are being purged with this walloping next Tuesday. Soon, whining about Bush will sound like us grousing about Carter – fun for heavy partisans but tiresome for the voter in the street.
Civil rights abuses similar to what happened to Joe the Plumber.
You can justifiably denigrate his celeb status in the GOP, you can justifiably laugh at him possibly running for Congress, but his confidential records were accessed four times and shared by a max Obama donor that works in the Ohio State Government simply because he brought attention on himself by helping Obama create a gaffe that stuck. The guy was playing on his front lawn with his kids and Obama toured his neighborhood – and for that, he’s investigated. Not cool with most folks across the political spectrum.
Overreaching too soon with things like Employee Free Choice Act, Fairness Doctrine, Gun Control, Abortion, etc.
It’s going to be a wild first two years. Biden was right – Putin is going to test us in a big way, particularly if oil stays below $70/barrel for too long.
Iran will most likely test a nuke in the next two years, and they will also be much more desperate with low oil prices.
The global economy is going to be very poor for the first two years, probably. Standard liberal spending and taxation won’t fly. Obama has surrounded himself with brilliant people, and he’s a shark – a very brilliant man. I’m interested and a little excited to see what he plans economically.
The way I see it, the Dems have realistically about 16 months to not royally fuck up, or it’s on. After that, Congress begins the mean season to try to save their jobs and will shy away from anything that might make them lose an election in bad times. If they squander this window (which I think Reid and Pelosi are deliciously capable of doing) by doing the pee pee dance on the GOP’s grave, we’ll have another 1994 soon enough.
So that’s why I’m hopeful…
…even before a momentous jousting of my party: We get to rid ourselves of the dead weight, rid ourselves of being beholden to the Dobsons of the world, and we have in Reid and Pelosi the political equivalent of the Coyote from the Roadrunner cartoons. If anyone is capable of giving the GOP back the reins of Congress in two years, it’s them.
PS I had a really cool experience today that made me proud of what Barack Obama has brought to a whole bunch of folks I work with/for. I don’t really want to get into it because it will out me personally and I’m not quite ready for that here, but I emailed my friend Paul about it and told him the details. I was actually a little teary with pride about it.
Everyone have a good night. Except you, Jambalaya. You can fuck off.
🙂
Personally….you’re already outed.
I think you and I have a good level of dialogue now.
I was outed? Where? I’m not even gay yet, as far as I know.
🙂
I missed you.
A high compliment.
I think I must have been missing you, because I was sending nasty emails to Mark Steyn and Jonah Goldberg, desperate for interaction with Republicans. 🙂
Is IF the Democratic majority:
– doesn’t hang on to the Bush bashing,
– doesn’t fuck up a national security response,
– goes back to leaving JTP alone,
– and in general heave way left
Obama and his congressional majority can run for awhile.
Works for me.
Beyond that,
I hope you are even partly right about the Republican party taking this opportunity to shed some unhelpful baggage. I’m not as confident as you that it will happen, but, hey, I have hope.
and I think most of us Dems, including Obama & Pelosi understand that. We don’t get a free ride. But I think we can do well, and I think the party is primed to do just that.
With that said, it will be slow and messy because democracy is slow & messy at the best of times.
We’re Democrats, we’ll fuck it up eventually.
both here and nationally. Really.
Yes, we’re going to get whooped on Tuesday most likely. But so what?
Elections are elections. You win some, you lose some. I’m not going to be crying and running gravel through my hair Tuesday night.
The reality is that Tuesday somewhere in the neighborhood of 45% of people are going to vote for John McCain. That’s with almost no support from African-Americans, waning support from Latinos, and little support from young voters. 45%…
The economy is likely to get worse before it gets better regardless of who has control. But only us as Republicans are going to be able to blame Democrats when things don’t improve immediately. It’s not fair, but its a political wedge that we can use and you can’t. That is politics.
And for those of you that think division and triangulation are the “politics of old” and the tired old tricks of Republicans that Obama has triumphed over, remember; Obama only sold your bill of goods to 51-53% of people. In Congress it’s more like 54-55% nationally. That’s hardly insurmountable, IMO.
Now, what we as Republicans do have to do is stop harping on issues like gay marriage. We can’t win over the middle by forcing them to make a choice on an issue they themselves are divided on. Same goes for abortion. Most people in the middle are at least marginally OK with abortion.
Anyway, the pressure is on the Democrats to preform. You can’t just do better than Republicans did and then say, “hey, we don’t suck as much as they did! Reelect us!” Voters are fickle and, IMO, not too bright as a group. As an individual, a voter is a rational, thinking person. As a group, voters are a ridiculous mob of unthinking, overreacting monkeys. Republicans tend to recognize that while Democrats don’t. If we can sway the mob in 2 years, it would be a major accomplishment.
But I also think, without knowing whatever major intervening events may occur, that whomever wins the White House will be favored for re-election. The law of large numbers says the economy should be coming back around by then and we’ll be out of Iraq no matter who is President.
You’re right though that the Democrats better get things in order pretty fast, or another 1994 may just await.
Whether it’s a 30, or 40, or 50 year cycle, this is an FDR moment. This is the Reagan pendulum coming back down.
Many of the Polsters know that Obama was not my first choice, not by a long shot. But now seeing him in action without the distraction of primary candidates, I am awe struck. His demeanor, his brilliance, his ability to motivate, his lack of putting down John and Sarah, his ability to comfort, it just goes on and on.
I think he will be another FDR transforming America. Listen to FDR’s speeches, listen to Obama’s. (I will add RR’s and JFK’s to the list of great orators. )
If so, around the time I’m 85 I’ll look forward to our republican comeback. 🙂
What I keep in mind is that FDR swept 101 new Dem/DFL’ers into Congress when he was elected. This election we’re looking at what, 30 tops? On top of that, by 1942, they were down to a 12 seat majority.
So, even if this is an FDR moment, remember, between FDR and Reagan there were still 16 years of republican presidents plus a really close election in 1960. Combine that with the fact that Obama can’t get elected 4 times, and that “FDR moment” isn’t quite as scary to me as a republican.
Just the enthusiams of the electorate for some significant changes that will benefit the middle and lower classes instead of the plutocrats.
That FDR’s election followed three years of severe depression with no appreciable or effective action by the Hoover administration. The current crisis is barely more than a month old, although in hindsight the failure to bail out Lehman’s was a decision worthy of the 31st President…
With the distraction of the primary gone, Obama is impressive. He definitely wasn’t my first choice. Or second or third or fourth for that matter…but, if he does the job he seems capable of, it could be FDR-esque indeed.
What McCain is winning is the past. This country is becoming non-white and in something like 10 – 20 years the majority winn be non-white. And every year older voters die off and more younger citizens turn 18 and can vote.
If the Republican base is old white dudes – you’re in a boatload of trouble. Especially considering that some of us old white dudes are Dems – like me.
If the “base” doesn’t grow beyond old white guys, of course we’re screwed.
My point about our numbers with minority demographics is that we have a huge opportunity to increase our strength there. We can’t really turn off more African-American voters. We’re at what, 2 or 3%? The same is true of Latino voters that supported president Bush at a 40%ish clip in 04 but what will only be 25-30% this time around. Those numbers can go up. But can they go up for Democrats? Only time will tell.
Younger voters don’t really concern me as much. Voters under 30 almost always have a liberal bent…not just now…but for decades. People tend to move to the right with age. It would be remarkable if that trend magically stopped.
The demographics are rapidly snowballing on the GOP.
…but lose big. If it gets worse, it will only be because your beloved Mr. Bush has brought us here. And the Dems will own the problems because you (the Republicans) couldn’t handle them.
The dying horse the Far Rignt has been riding for 30 years is almost dead.
Good news for the Democrats is that the Right will be sitting tall in the saddle on that same horse for next 20 years.
These are my Election Eve wishes.
that Obama’s ascendancy to power is apparently creating a backlash. I saw a sticker the other day that said,
“…The 2nd American Revolution has begun. Defy Obama!
signed: The Resistance
….”
I wonder if the mad crush of public passion for Democrats this year is generating a reciprocal rejuvenation in the Republican base.
The current Publicans have done enough damage for multiple generations of backlash. Shit poor government, hypocrisy, damnable lies, and shoveling more shit through the public’s eyepiece is no recipe for salvation….or “resistance”……It’s a recipe for self annihilation.
Have at it.
Do you really think so? I actually think we’ll never have long majorities anymore as the US voting public becomes dominated by channel-changing, video-gaming MTV alumni.
As a country I think our appetite for change is only ramping up as our attention spans ratchet down.
He engendered a majority in Congress for what – 40 years? Yes many things are a lot different now but the power of incumbency has become even greater.
is short, about one 30 second spot to the next.
good at manipulation. They play very well to humanities most basic instincts. But once in a while they fuck up.
Witness this:
a) Why would Sarkozy be calling her?
b) Why would her staff fail to vette the call?
c) Thank god the call didn’t come at 3am.
d) I’m not sure many people would know Sarkozy doesn’t speak much English- but I’d have thought the campaign staff would know.
e) At the end, after they id themselves as from Montreal, you can hear her say “…some radio station in France.” Montreal, France.
f) At least she’s a good sport. Giggling and trying to shrug it off.
My biggest concern is that she doesn’t know Canada’s PM. Dude! Your state borders his country.
The Sarkozy thing didn’t bother me so much, OTOH, I watch too much foreign news and would probably know his voice.
But I’ve been to both Paris and Montreal. There’s no way that accent would sound remotely like either. It was obviously fake.
And I don’t think she laughed it off. She asked for the station’s call numbers twice, which sounded like she was threatening retribution. Then she passed off the phone without saying anything else to the guys.
She sounds like she wants to take a hit out on that radio station. In her rage after finding out it was a prank, she asks for the call letters immediately after being told what they were. Then she says “for chrissakes” as she hands the phone back to her recently unemployed assistant.
She’s not a “good sport”, she is obviously enraged.
Not that I don’t blame her. I’d hate being her too.
Republicans won’t have the relatively moderate John McCain as a presidential candidate to kick around — and then reluctantly rally behind — anymore.
If he chooses to run in 2010 – he could be running against a popular, moderate D, governor. Not some unheard of enviro lawyer or other unkown.
The humiliation of losing the Presidency he thinks he totally deserved will really destroy him. I think he has nowhere to go.
He’ll retire with his wife’s trust fund and spend the rest of his life as everybody’s favorite powerless pundit. Maybe he’ll replace Pat Buchanan.
a Sunday show regular and an SNL standby, tut-tutting at every Obama administration misstep, provoking some serious buyers’ remorse among voters who might have voted for him if he hadn’t gone into the gutter and picked Palin (those are two separate actions).
But you’re right, he’s got nothing to gain and only humiliation to risk by running for another term in the Senate.
In both chambers of the assembly we will at the very worst loose one seat (quote me on this) and the pendulum will begin its swing back right. You have reached your zenith for this swing pols(ters) and it will swing back, this is still a conservative country and I actually hope you all take the “mandate” and run with it. It will result in “blowback” that will favor conservatives all the more, think Jimmy “I’m a Peanut farmer” Carter and the 80’s. Just remember, I will be whispering “victory is fleeting” in your ear’s (before I get “you don’t understand the internet and therefore your point is irrelevant–I’m talking figuratively).
McCain, because he is a bad-ass, is doing way the hell better than he should be given the climate. I just hope that pols has the balls to admit that.
I’m relatively convinced that the Republican candidate could stay home through the whole election season and still pull 35%. McCain is doing relatively well compared to that base support because of his “reputation” as a “maverick”, not because he’s “a bad-ass”; next time you won’t have him to bolster the numbers.
Democrats will (fingers crossed) have an opportunity to prove themselves or fall over on their face after the election. My best prediction: while they’ll have a hard time of it, they will in fact pull it out and change the direction of the country. In 4 years, the economy will be strengthening; Obama will win re-election easily, but Democrats will lose a couple of seats in the Senate after gaining their 60-vote super-majority in 2010.
Are you really that naive? Do you believe that there is no pendulum?
If you don’t believe me that HE actually said that, lol, read the transcript of his victory speeches, lol, hahahaha. Obama will not walk on water, but lower it….
… then point me to a specific speech.
Like so many zany right-wing talking points, the “lower the ocean levels” ‘quote’ doesn’t seem to have a real origin. Usually when you get a quote like that, enough people link to the original transcript that the transcript itself rises to the top of a Google search. Those terms aren’t mentioned by Obama in the first five pages of Google results – only right-wing blog posts.
I did finally find one reference that might help: a brave soul posted a response to a right-wing poster noting that Obama never promised to “lower ocean levels”, only to work to stop the rise of ocean levels caused by global waring.
No lowering of the oceans there.
If his net effect on the water level of the oceans is to slow their rise, it could be argued that he’s lowering their levels from where they would have been, had he not won the Dem nomination…
And not a Bad Thing, either. If we have a choice between watching the coastline flood or trying to slow that down, I think the choice is clear.
Not sure if you’re plugged in to the chatter, but the “buzz” on the right-wing blogs on this is that he’s acting like the next Moses, “lowering the ocean levels”. It’s laughable. Well, it would be if it weren’t sad.
I didn’t say “permanent”. I only predicted 4 years out. Maybe that seems like a long time to you, what with the GOP being out of power, but it’s a drop in the bucket in history.
Will the Democratic majority be long-term? That depends on how well they follow through with reform efforts, cleaning up the mess that Bush has left behind, and enacting positive policy changes that the People can relate to. The pendulum will swing back eventually; the pattern says that voters get more conservative when the country starts doing well…
A lot depends on the Republicans changing their bad habits and fixing the party. There are easily predictable scenarios where the GOP falls into a permanent minority party status; if it continues to march rightward in search of the party purity it thinks it lost, then a social moderate / fiscal conservative party could spring up between the GOP and the Democrats and take the Republican Party’s place as the second major party.
As for my predictions, let’s break it down for you:
1) The economic crisis will ease in perhaps another 18 months or less. This gives it a bit longer than most recessions to recover.
2) The 2010 Senate election map is a strong one for Democrats; combined with the easing of economic hard times, I predict a couple of seats gained in the 2010 elections.
3) Democrats will be able to work with Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, and a few other Republicans in the Senate to pass much though not all of their agenda.
4) Because of the above, Democrats will be seen as doing well in the lead-in to the 2012 election.
5) The 2012 Senate election map is particularly hard for Democrats. I expect the shiny will have worn off enough that Republicans pick up a seat or two – not as much as they could were things not looking better for the citizens.
6) Obama will get credit for an even hand and will have an easy re-election.
Nothing I said above is a mystical secret. The opinions of economic experts and the lay of political maps are widely available. And we’ve been talking the future of the Republican Party here in depth for some time now.
Take it or leave it, it’s just my opinion.
The liberal/progessive/conservative/plutocrat pendulum swings back and forth, back and forth.
Just as the “permanent Republican majority” had a half life of a couple of years, so would any attempt at a permanent Democratic majority.
The decades of what has been called “movement conservatism” has ended. When the R party selects moderates and not wing nuts, then and only then will the pendulum move back, Colorado or nationally.
In the meantime, enjoy your whistling in the dark self-delusions.
I believe in the pendulum… the one that swung to the right for 25 years and is swinging the other way. Sure, there were Dem majorities in Congress much of the time, even a popular and effective Dem president. But that’s how the big cycles work. Heck, there were two two-term Repub presidents during the last big cycle of liberal sway.
So, breathe deep. I know you need to buck yourself up as the political cycle moves away from where your heart is for a generation, but there’s no need to be a naive blowhard.
Carter had two major problems Obama is unlikely to face.
First, Carter was not inspiring. In fact he sucked as the “leader” of our country. And that is a key part of the job of president. Side by side with Reagan who was awesome on that was killer.
Second, Obama is unlikely to get a challange from the left wing of the party as Kennedy did to Carter. That mortally wounded Carter with both a destructive primary and the base mad at him during the election.
And even with all that, it was a close race.
I guess the primary against Kennedy was close considering Carter was President and all… But he got hammered against Reagan.
I would agree there’s little chance of Obama being anything like Carter as prez. But, if he does leave an opening, Hillary might try to “Kennedy” her way in there. 🙂
Well, not really. But we’ll finally get a President who’s able to effectively change the course of this nation once and for all toward energy independence as Carter urged all those years ago.
This time, though, the country will likely go willingly.
If you are able to define “change” I possibly give you respect.
1. To cause to be different.
2. To give a completely different form or appearance to; transform.
In all seriousness, when I’m talking about “change” above, it is to begin implementation of an energy independence plan. That is a multi-pronged plan that will cover a mix of incentives, investment, and inspiration (read: the Bully Pulpit). More efficiency at home, business and on the road. Develop some of the technologies that have been put forward in recent years and bring them to production level. And motivate people to work toward this vision.
We’ve done it before; we transformed this country into a military powerhouse in a few short years during WWII, and we put a man on the moon in under a decade. We will need to recover some of our resources – for example, transferring full control of Iraq to the Iraqi government and bringing our troops home, ending subsidies to Big Oil, and closing offshore tax loopholes. But we can do it – in fact, we must or else we could lose our pre-eminent position as a world power.
LOL, prove to me he is not… oh wait, you can’t…
Apparently that’s what the Instapundit-fans are planning.
And if any of them do try it, do we really want them forming “Galt’s Gulch” in Colorado? Can our economy withstand a bunch of 16-year-old boys who have just figured out why nobody likes them? (Because they’re super-geniuses who are too awesome for the real world, dontcha know?)
Can you elaborate a bit for those who don’t read InstaPundit or understand your terms?
He led all the entrepreneurs, engineers, etc. to drop out of society because government was too oppressive, thus paralyzing it. Apparently he and his followers set up a place in Colorado. (At least I think that’s the story; despite urging from 16-year-old boys who have just discovered how awesome they are, I refuse to ever read Ayn Rand books.)
Conservatives started discussing the prospects of doing this under an Obama administration following a post here.
It’s a great read.
Most of the time when someone’s making fun of Rand, or generalizing Atlas’ fans as being teenaged boys, they haven’t read the book.
If it’s too long or complicated for you there’s a Cliff’s Notes version. Let me know, I’d love to buy you a copy.
🙂
to avoid seeing through to the logical conclusion of a theory divorced from the realities of the human condition. Not a very good writer either. Kind of the flip side of the Soviet dialectic style, clumsy lit with cardboard cutout characters in a black and white world for the soul purpose of promoting an “ism”, re-education in the form of a novel.
My belief is that, in the end, all “isms”, whether benign or malevolent, carried to their logical conclusion are equally silly and unworkable because isms are ideals which are fine for goal setting but must always make allowances for practical material reality.
who read that book and took it a bit too seriously, I think I might be able to stand it. Now that Rand’s political philosophy has been totally discredited, shot three times, and buried in an unmarked grave, it’s no longer quite so offensive. As for getting me a copy, my brother’s been trying to get me read either that or Fountainhead for years.
But Objectivists still creep me out, and probably always will.
It’s interesting to ponder, but there are some really goofy implications when one thinks about trying to actually pull it off in real life.
Rand nails the flawed policies of today’s more corrupt elements of the Labor movement, though, in the book and philosophically decimates the collectivist principles the antagonists in the book have.
I think you’d probably like it – as long-winded as it is, it’s still a great story.
YOU CAN”T HIDE FROM THE TRUTH FOREVER!!!!
🙂
…that I’ve ended two posts with smiley faces. I use them to imply sarcasm, but hopefully you get that by now. I apologize to anyone who might have been ‘over-cuted’ by my gross excess use of the colon-parentheses team.
I will assume from here on out that those of you whom I actually give a shit whether you read my posts understand my snarkiness as not personal or cruel, and I’ll refrain from the smileys.
(_*_)
When I first read your posts, I figured you were a guy in your mid-50s, but then after all the smiley faces I’ve been thinking you’re probably 16 and a girl. 🙂
Yeah, I’ve heard it’s a difficult read, but maybe I should get around to it at some point. If only so I’ll have more things to criticize about it.
Actually talked with my brother (PA-based) to see if he’d vote for Obama. No deal, but at least I persuaded him against voting for Chuck Baldwin. (He was a huge Ron Paul fan, but he freaked when I told him the Constitution Party was a Jesus party.) I also persuaded him not to “Go John Galt” if Obama wins.
And even when I was still a conservative I hated the damn brick. And I hated it even more once I started talking to libertarians and Libertarians online. The only people I dislike more than communists are the smug libertarians who are so cocksure that they’d be winners if the guvment would just get out of their way instead of the basement dwelling losers they are right now.
To be fair I know some perfectly sensible libertarian types, but for ever one of them I’ve had run ins at science fiction conventions with a half dozen more who’ll defend slavery and dueling. Crazy bastards who I wouldn’t want anywhere near the levers of power in government. And Rand’s fans in particular are completely immune to facts, reality, or sense. I would point out to them that even if they were technically right about income tax they couldn’t win in any court. But did they listen? No. And did they get hammered by the court and the last I heard living in their cars or moving back into basements due to their bullheaded intransigence? Yes.
Rand’s characters were all boring cardboard cut outs. Even the protagonists annoyed the hell out of me and I enjoy some pretty thin SF. Say what you will about Asimov, a great developer of characters he was not.
but there’s nothing about not paying income tax in Atlas. It’s a primer on the forces that try to equalize outcome rather than opportunity.
A long primer. Really long.
I got the impression that most fans of Atlas Shrugged thought it was a primer on the invisible hand of the market, if left free, would make all outcomes proportional to effort. And a call to revolution on the part of what might be called today the Creative Class. And tax protesting fitting in with the idea of a revolution caused by the creative class I see how they fit together for some fans of Rand.
Never mind then.
I’m the biggest Star Wars fan you’ll ever see, but I haven’t liked science fiction since I was a teenager. (Most SF fans I know agree that SW isn’t SF like ST is, and they also read this stuff without ever getting confused by the acronyms.)
My wife watches Sci-Fi channel sometimes, and I have to go into another room every time.
I’m the guy who can’t even watch Joss Whedon shows (despite all my friends telling me they’re super-awesome). I understand Star Wars can seem too preachy and dry, but Christ, can your characters take something seriously?
Top 10 Reasons NOT to Vote for Obama
10. Education and Health Care – Obama’s record in Chicago speaks volumes here. Chicago has one of the worst educational systems in America and he did absolutely nothing to improve it. He has no clear policy on Education for America either. We all know everyone should be able to afford college for our kids but where’s the plan to make that happen? Health Care is another joke. Again he did nothing in Chicago to make any improvements in their system. His policy for America would force small businesses into providing a service they can’t afford or penalize them thru fines for not doing so. How will that help when you lose your job because costs have now gone up and they can’t afford to keep you. You’ll be without a job AND health care then!
9. Foreign policy is a danger sign. Sitting down unconditionally with terrorist nations is in the countries worst interest. In addition, he has no foreign policy experience having never been to most of these countries or met their leaders. Even the leader of Italy recently said after meeting Obama that he had serious doubts about his knowledge or ability to lead the US. Who has recently supported Obama….Libya said 3 weeks ago that the Muslim community is watching closely in anticipation of their African Muslim brother gaining control of the richest, most influential country in the world.
8. Redistribution of wealth policy – why work when you can sit back and receive a check from those that do?! Redistribution is much different from our current policy. Our taxes support those in need through the funding of programs meant to help those in need. Redistribution will assume everyone below a certain number is in need and then give money to them regardless of the circumstance. So again….why work when you can just get a check?
7. Tax policy – Obama’s voting record shows he voted 94 times against tax cuts in while in Chicago after promising those constituent tax cuts. Do you think all of a sudden he’s for them now? First it was those making less than $250,000 would get a tax cut, then he said it was $200,000, then Biden said it was $150,000, and the latest is from Richardson who now says it’s $104,000. Which is it? AND…raising taxes on the upper percentile of Americans will severely reduce our capability to grow the economy. Who do you think owns the businesses, funds business expansion, hires Americans when business is able to increase? Like it or not, it’s the upper percentile of Americans! They take the risk with their money. If you raise their taxes, they will have less to invest, less to expand their businesses which equates to no growth and less jobs. Even a 5th grader understands this basic concept!!
6. Campaign Funding – misled McCain and others after shaking hands and decided to take private funding, much of which has gone unverified. This was a calculated lie meant to deceive the public and McCain. And how much has come from overseas from countries that want to sway the election? Where’s the verification that it has all been legal? This is exactly why the McCain-Feingold bill was past. Obama has spent almost $1 Billion dollars in his campaign and will have millions left over afterwards. And as if he had won the election already, aired his first state of the union address to the nation with a ВЅ infomercial last week. With this kind of dishonesty, can you trust him with the US Treasury?
5. War in Iraq – Obama speaks about how he opposed the war and spoke out about it at the time. To who? He wasn’t even in the US Senate then! In addition, he continues to deny the surge works and will pull our troops out within 12 months of taking office regardless of the conditions, consequences or advice of those in country. Our troops will come home disgraced and defeated leaving a gaping hole in Iraq for rogue nations to fill, thus destabilizing the Middle East for years to come.
4. National Security – Obama’s plans for Nat’l Security includes: reducing the military at a time when America needs to continue our war on terrorism, repealing the Patriot’s Act that has provided invaluable information to pre-empt further attacks in the US and other free nations, reducing spending on advanced military weaponry such as our missile defense initiatives and advanced fighter capability. In addition, Obama has never shown he’s been a supporter of the military community, demonstrated by his one trip to Iraq and Afghanistan after being ridiculed by McCain for never having visited.
3. Past Associations – like it or not, Obama’s past associations should be a concern to every American. Consider: 20 years in a congregation with a preacher delivering sermon after sermon full of hate for the white American community, even calling him the father he never had in his book; having his Chicago campaign launched by a well know terrorist and then gaining and sitting on a Board with the same man for many years; having a long term close relationship with Farrakhan and his organization for years throughout his career; and now we find ties to a known Palestinian supporter who advocates death to Israel. And why is the LA Times not releasing the tape of the event where these two, along with Ayers attended? The latest is also his Aunt who we find out yesterday is in the country illegally. Of course Obama claims he didn’t know anything about that either. His own family?? Wake up everyone…..he has been lying about these associations. Ask yourself this…. who have we not heard about??
2. Energy Policy – advocates only wind, solar and biodiesel fuels are viable options. Only supported more drilling and the “potential” for nuclear when pushed against the wall. Denies that drilling will provide quicker relief while other fuels are developed. Why do we only get his attention and endorsement of considering all avenues when he’s pushed against the wall politically.
1. Lack of Experience – ask yourself this question before you pull the lever, check the box or punch the chad through the paper on Tuesday…….if I was the owner of the US and had both resumes side by side – who has the most experience, credentials, and proven results? It’s not about who had the best speech, was able to pull in the crowds, etc…..it’s about who is best qualified and had the proven experience and on the job education for the position. You wouldn’t even interview one of the candidates if the resumes were side by side. The choice is clear…..John McCain should be your choice!
everything you claim is refuted here. Please don’t come back until you think for yourself and post something original.
From the Republican mayor of San Diego