And when we hear from a journalist who's unafraid to draw attention to the critical use of the c-word in an hour of economic crisis, we can see that American journalism has made it to the crossroads, too.

Any one want to take bets on how long it will take for this quote to be used to prove that Obama is a closet socialist/communist?

The editing will remove the word "crony:", which is the key element and just say that Obama is against capitalism.

 

Not that Obama is wrong to say what he said, and I think it is an important point to make.  The essence of his message is not that "capitalism" is wrong, but that it can be abused without oversight and regulation.  And when that abuse is aided and abetted by the likes of the Republic Party, everyone ends up getting the shaft.

Al I have no proof I have no real reason to go here but I just can't help wondering about the timing of this crisis. it is just so damn perfect. so I say to myself what if?

the convntions are over. the Palin madness has simmered down. the bounces are over. the distractions and lies by the GOP have had time to get old. and then this crisis to shove the economy in everyone's face. even in the face of the MSM that does not want to go there since they don't have a script for it. and if we stay focused on the economy and especially an unravelling of the debt explosion of the last 10 years then we are in Obama's home park

I just am very suspicious at heart so I can't help thinking what if?

...when they keep stealing it?  Is this the ever important distinction we need?  Crony capitalism??  McCain is now out there running around like a screaming populist banshee - "make goverment work for the people, too much greed, regulate, too many special interests..."  The record clearly indicates otherwise but now they are even putting this stuff in ads to confuse people...convince people THEY are the ones out there fighting for meaningful regulations and reform.

John, maybe they should have put in a hyphen to make that edit more difficult??

BTW, Pailin's fav/unfav finally went negative today in the Research 2000 poll.

If he gets cited incorrectly he can repeat his statement, and as has happenend before, can drive the narrative nicely. To me it is utterly amazing, to which extent Obama was able to define the content of the debate, and especially who the good guys are. This would never have happened with any other of the Dem candidates.

The good guys are the regulators that are up against crony capitalism and work for change. I am waiting for McCain to parrot Obama's line on crony capitalism like he has parroted the change meme and the regulation concept:-)

This is an historic opportunity. Economic security trumps everything else. And Obama wins that argument hands down. (BTW the Dow is now minus 300 and falling despite the AIG bail out.) And people look at the AIG bailout and wonder where their bail-out is, on health care and on jobs. It's about economic class and money, not the stupid culture wars.

Obama has been great in this period, as has Biden.

McCain is trying to steal the economic populism message, but isn't a credible speaker on it. But I'd like to see the Obama campaign make McCain own his record of strongly supporting deregulation. He is switching sides -- just rhetorically, I suspect -- and can't be allowed to do it. It's a good talking point for all of us.

Wow, maybe this is the next shoe dropping in the $400 haircut/tanning bed in the governor's mansion/frivolous spending narrative that Al laid out the other day.

Sarah Palin's wasteful ways

She poses as a fiscal watchdog, but when Palin was mayor, she grabbed city funds to give her office a pricey "bordello" makeover.

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/09/17/palin_mayor/

 

http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/

 

New Mexico is a good sign... closing in Ohio and Montana.

Keep up the good work Field Hands!!

Al,

 

A suggestion. I believe this issue should not be framed as "we need better regulation" but "we need cops on the white collar crime beat."

 

(I'm not saying you're framing it this way, but with your megaphone, perhaps other -- and eventually the Obama campaign -- will re-frame the issue.)

 

Republicans have successfully demonized the term "regulation" -- people associate it with red tape, saving the spotted owl but losing jobs, etc.

 

But if you talk about this in terms of policing, in terms of the white collar criminals making off with millions and laughing all the way to the bank, in terms of political and industry cronies in league with the white collar criminals, well, I think that resonates.

 

Just my opinion.

 

@Tara:  how do we keep them from stealing our messages?

1) keep surrogates like Claire McCaskill out there--did you hear her call McPalin liars yesterday on Rachel!?!?!  Not once, not twice, but continously!  Like over and over again and "without blinking"!  Go Claire!

2) by funding indie journalists like Authentic Journalism, Michigan Messenger, etc. It dawned on me this morning when reading on a previous post that indie journalism outlets are self-funded and therefore owned by the journalists, not the some big corporation...it is the same with the Obama Campaign. We finance and own that campaign--with a little help from Babs Streisand...

3) by donating to people like Al and Jed to keep them going and enabling them to keep updating their bandwidth--which they keep needing more of because more and more people are reading them...

[go to www.jedreport.com right now and click him some ducats--he's had to up his server about 3 times in the last 10 days!]

4) be participating in the Neighbor-to-Neighbor program from BHO [www.barackobama.com]..."face-to-face is how we'll win this race!"  On the site, click on "Action" and you'll find a lot of ways to work this campaign...especially if you're bilingual and/or multi-cultural/racial!

I am realizing--especially since Al's *real* story on the tanning bed went viral--that everyone else is watching "us", more and more and more.  Therefore, we just have to keep making more noise!

I have to keep exercising my "remote button finger"...the lies from McPalin are just too sickening!

 

 

waterprise2 AKA Pam

Liberal with a Capital L!

 

This post is one of my all-time favorites, except I think an interactive ticker is necessary today.  Why do I keep feeling that we're stuck in time and the year is 1929?  Time for this groundhog to go back in its hole and stay.

To John in Illinois,

If someone does say Sen. Obama is a closet socialist (and I agree that someone will say it, because Republican operatives have already whispered it), how does that person explain that a Republican administration made a decision to loan AIG $85 billion dollars? I've been reading that the government (you and me, etc.) now have an 80% stake in said company.  What is that called?

  http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/16/news/companies/AIG/?postversion=2008091710

 

We have the capitalist-communist dichotomy, and then there's the socialist viewpoint. What do y'all make of this?

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/sep2008/stat-s17.shtml

How do we integrate individuality with community? Barack addressed balance in his acceptance speech... not either/or, but both/and. What of socialist thinking and practice is of benefit here?

PPP Virginia Poll

Obama 48 McCain 46

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_Virginia_91735.pdf

Come on Virginia. If we win Virginia we win the Whitehouse.

As an unfunded Yippie Lincoln Park 68 vet who thinks that on occasion thou dost protest too much, if Barack's crony lingo does become an issue it will rank with lipstick for irrelevance. I watched Marxism die on the vine decades ago and have developed my own phrase for what the world now embraces -- benign genocide.

Actually it is not original, as someone used it to describe Australian treatement of Aborigines before it hopped into my addled brain.

Today capitalism is simply the sum total of all enterprise whose aim is to make money. Philanthropy is the sum total of all who work under the guise of not-for-profit including the good works of governments, hospitals, etc.

Benign genocide is what is left when both of these hubris-laden monoliths fail to achieve their claimed objectives. It is what UNICEF puts out in death stats annually.

I have no beard, despise Nader and do honor Barack's CO creds.

I just hope the story gets out there (as Al wrote about yesterday) that McCain is a deregulator to the core.  This is key because McCain personally can be directly tied to the mess - via his voting record and his buddy Phil Gramm - to the deregulation of Wall Street.  This needs to be made explicit - my personal preference would be to have Obama do a press conference on his economic plan that includes a list of the votes in congress and who voted for them that has lead to this.  Paint McCain as the deregulator and crony capitalist that he is.

KD

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/16/AR2008091603152.html

WaPo has a good piece on latest voter reg numbers out of VA that show 283,000 more voters on the rolls since beginning of 2008-- including 33,000 in the first HALF of September.  The biggest increases are happening in places that historically vote Democratic, are 42% from the 25 and under demographic, and disproportionately AA. 

Bush won VA in 2004 by 270,000 so we Fieldhands need to keep pushing until the voter reg deadline on Oct 6.

 

 

I find part of my excitemet for an Obama economy is his willingness to not stop at the old "capitalism = good" right vs. "capitalism = bad" extreme left fight of the past. Capitalism and free markets are an extremely effective economic system, but unfettered free markets break down. Laissez faire fails because of the law of the commons, external effects of actions taken, it assumes infinite knowledge on the part of the consumer, assumes that individuals act in their own self interest, monopoly problems, etc. Obama's speech yesterday was from an individual who understood that the economy has gone wrong in a manner that could have been prevented through proper government oversight, but does not think that the government should be moving the economy in desired directions through sheer will. The fastest way to get the sheep down the mountain is not to walk each one down by leash, but it's laughably foolish that the shepherds didn't try to stop the flock from running off the side of the cliff until now.

I am really excited about his use of free markets to address things such as global climate change. I also have always thought his health care plan was vastly superior to Clinton's because it actually allows the market some breathing room. He's refusing to fall into either trap. He won't let it fall of a cliff, but won't put needless restrictions on it either. The right thinks the river god should be allowed to flow wherever it wants and will sacrifice the town to its flood if that's god's will. The extreme left thinks the river is evil and will only allow priests to bring water to the townspeople after they go through elaborate purification rituals. Obama wants to build an aqueduct system.

Eliot - American Research Group has got to be the pollster with the absolute worst track record this year. Ignore them if your team is up. Ignore them if your team is down. They're what we used to call in the dial-up days of the Internet, "line noise."

Al,

I am now 100% certain the Obama campaign has a direct line to "The Field", and would not be surprised if you are an "unpaid advisor" to the team.  It's almost as though the words flow from your keyboard to their minds, and PRESTO we get this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONM7148cTyc

 

Posted by a friend of mine on some other board:

I just happened to catch this nauseating story. This morning, SEC Chairman Chris Cox announced that they were going to start enforcing
the rules outlawing naked short sales.

Undeterred naked shorting over the past year has been one of the PRIME causes of this economic disaster and today the SEC announces they are
going to "START enforcing the rules"?

Christoper Cox, appointed to run the SEC by his old friend George Bush and whose appointment was applauded by John McIamsofuckungstupid announced today he will START enforcing the rules?

You're doin a heck of a job, Coxie ....uhuhuhuhuh

This is all a lot like the S&L thing, only bigger. The vultures are seeing that McCain won't win and so they're letting the levees break now and get out.

 

who once observed that in America we have socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.

Twas ever thus. The government has long been there with a helping hand to pull back those captains of industry who found themselves teetering too close to the brink. And for the rest of us? A ready supply of homilies exhorting us to "pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps" when times get tough.

It's an old dichotomy, but one that Obama should be able to frame to his advantage in the next month and a half.

For the past 2 years, people in the industry have been talking about a meltdown like what we've been seeing in the news for the last week.   For the past few years, a substantial part of the American economy has been sustained by middle-class spending, much of it derived from refinancing mortgages, which in turn generated the Wall Street craze for manufacturing derivatives and other exotic off-the-books instruments (in part because hedge fund managers get to treat their percentage of the funds' profits as capital gains, not regularly taxable income).  

the bail-outs of today are the result of letting a market that rewards unequally scream down the tracks with no regulation whatsoever- the market had no way to measure the risk of the products being sold and the hedge funds were allowed to act as banks with no regulation or capital requirements whatsoever -- not a surprise that the financial markets shot off the cliff like WIL.E.COYOTE for a while before they realized there was no value in what they were holding.

 that is the thrust of the crony capitalism that Obama called out today--  even fiscally conservative individuals are now screaming that there is a DIFFERENCE between regulating the financial markets and creating regulations that restore trust in the financial markets-- meaning transparency in what you're selling, giving consumers an accurate way to value risk and taxing profits across the board in an equitable way.

so now i sit here in the office and field calls from clients who are realizing today that even though their company has lots of value, they can't meet the stringent values now required by the bank to renew their line of credit and they may have to file chapter 11.  these people played by the rules in the capitalist system and they are getting screwed because of the total abdication of responsibility from this administration in letting special interests get their piece.  crony capitalism indeed. 

Eliot - American Research Group has got to be the pollster with the absolute worst track record this year. Ignore them if your team is up. Ignore them if your team is down. They're what we used to call in the dial-up days of the Internet, "line noise."

 

I wouldn't give ARG much credit either, but 538.com rates it a bit better than Gallup (which still means in the lower half of the pollsters) and far better than CBS/NYT.

Even if ARG wasn't considered to an extremely poor-quality pollster (they are), there are enough incredibly screwy numbers in there that just defy any reasonable justification (does anyone really believe that Obama is only 6 points ahead in his home state of Illinois, a state which Kerry won by 11 points, or that McCain is doing better than Bush did in Kansas [especially in light of McCain's opposition to ethanol, which I'll admit is probably the one place where I agree with McCain over Obama one])

You know the two inevitablities of death and taxes, well you can add a third to the mix: the unreliability of ARG.

Some thoughts, because I can't help myself... (though Al's right on ARG's general suckiness this year, as confirmed by Nate).

Those NC numbers aren't encouraging (similar to others, though), but the x-tabs give McCain the 18-49 (granted a huge slice) demo, as well as women.  Hmmm...  For comp, the PPP VA poll has Obama with a 52-44 (18-29) and 48-46 (30-45) age break and Obama is up with women 51-44.

The biggest diff b/w NC and VA seems to be how the pollster suggests each candidate is doing with their party base.  in NC, McCain GOP 89-5, Obama DEM 27-21.  VA:  McC 85-12, O 91-7.  Potential diff b/w NC and VA?  NC sample 75 "White" (M 68-25), 24 AA (O 89-4); VA, no sample, but "W" (M 60-35), AA (O 90-9), Hispanic (O 51-36).

WV does seem like a potential missed opportunity, as Nate (or Sean) suggested a few days back.  ARG says M 49 - O 44, with O winning women and the 18-49, but only taking home Dems 64-31.  Paging HRC...

NVs x-tabs make it seem closer than the 49-46 McCain.  Both do well with their base.  Obama wins Independents and Women and 18-49.  McCain's lead seems based on Men (M 52-43) and a big 50+ ages sample.

Biggest pleasant surprises?  Obama is killing with Indies in CO.  McCain is only at 55% in MS.

ARG seems to think that skimming a few Indies and Men in MT would flip it "blue", too.  Currently at a tight 49-47.

A friend of mine who ran an underground newspaper used to repeat, "If you don't like the news, go out and make some yourself.'

So, people, stop complaining or lauding the big name surrogates - be a surrogate.

You're a surrogate when you talk to undecided voters.

You're a surrogate when you register people to vote and tell them that it does in fact mater who is president.

You're a surrogate when you're phonebanking or canvassing.

You're a surrogate when you talk to others about volunteering themselves.

You're a surrogate when you talk to people at the store, at the soccer game, at a barbecue, a social, when you're dropping off or picking up your kids, wherever you haunt.

You're a surrogate when you write a letter or an op-ed for a local newspaper or newsletter or blog.

Don't wait for the surrogates to speak. Say what you think needs saying.

Here's one of the most effective election TV ads I've ever seen. It was for the Dutch socialist party, and became an instant hit. It'll be difficult to follow for the audience here, but it's a very simple concept. The leader of the party, Jan Marijnissen, received a letter from a woman, a retiree living on social security. In it, she described the problems she encounters making ends meet, but adds that "she still manages" and that she realizes that Marijnissen probably can't do much about it. If he would only bring it to the attention of his colleagues and the government. Marijnissen then read the full letter in a parliamentary session. Later they produced this ad with all kinds of different people reading parts of it. The party won a landslide victory - not just because of this spot but also because they have a better grassroots organization than any of the others. I love this ad, because it's advertising "from the bottom up" instead of talking to people from above.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/17/senate-dem-raises-keating_n_127088.html

Worth reading the whole thing - he ties it all, the choice of Palin, everything, together under the heading of "poor judgement" - the very words used to describe McCain's involvement in the Keating 5 by his peers at the time. 

Is Sherrod out on the stump for Obama in OH at all?

I recently saw Sherrod Brown in Maine, stumping with Tom Allen. He and Allen were quite good. By the way, in response to a question, he said that Ted Strickland was quite involved in the Ohio campaign. In Maine, Brown was very well-received by the labor folks in the crowd, although I heard one ask him after the talk about how to talk to people who are afraid of Obama because of his race and what they've heard about him that isn't true. His advice: Tell them the truth about Obama the person and press the issue differences.

What to make of this?

Excerpt:

------

THE POLL: CNN/Time/Opinion Research Corp. poll, presidential race in Michigan among registered voters

THE NUMBERS: Barack Obama 45 percent, John McCain 42 percent, Ralph Nader 6 percent

------

Link:  The Associated Press

Here is the actual PDF of the poll:

http://www.time.com/time/2008/TOPSTATE3.pdf

Back in 2000 when Nader really made a splash, I remember the UAW threatened to endorse him. They were really pissed off about Clinton and NAFTA, and hoped to get Gore to pay attention to an important constituency. There was some good logic in that tactic. Then.

This time around, it is insanity to be running around screaming there is no difference between to the two parties. The crazy thing is, some of the people who supported  Democrats during the primary, like Dennis Kucinich, are the ones who are now saying there is no difference! Yet Dennis Kucinich is a Democrat who supports Obama? I am waiting for the cognitive dissonance to cause their heads to implode, but I won't hold my breath.

Some of the peeps pushing Nader are starting to make me wonder; even more than the psychotic Hillary supporters who are still bashing Obama this late in the game. If they somehow manage to fuck up the election by helping to deliever a swing state like Michigan to McCain, the backlash against Naderites that was seen after the 2000 mess will pale in comparision.

Roman O - If those Michigan numbers are accurate, and trends from four years ago hold, you can expect Obama to pick up at least half those Nader votes by election day for a gain of three points. That said, it seems like an outlier for me.

Al and Field Hands,

I can't tell you how much The Field has kept me sane these last few weeks of the Palin bounce--as we used to say in the '70s, it has helped me to keep the faith!  And when any of my friends are having a chicken little day, I send them here, so thank you for keeping us all on an even plane!

Mainer, I love your "we are the surrogates" post--I put together a list of progessive Democratic events for the greater Chicagoland area on the Illionis Dem Net website--would you mind if I used this and credited you and The Field?  Thanks!

 

It's never been regulation or no regulation; Republicans are just more likely to regulate in favor of the filthy rich. But the crisis of crony capitalism – which is in no way new for most of us on this planet – is bigger than regulation in any case. This, for me, is where we must be approaching the political discussion:

the money is itself crap. It’s based on a centralized lending scheme and has no intrinsic value. The Fed no longer even releases the metric telling us how much money is out there. All this means is that you can’t count on capitalism anymore. Your wealth is not how many paper assets you have. It’s not even how much land you have (or think you have). It’s what you can do. It’s your value to other people. The real economy need not suffer in the downfall of the speculative economy. If anything, the real economy has been repressed by the speculative economy. Real farmers have been crushed by Big Agra, real druggists have been crushed by Wal-Mart and real transportation alternatives have been crushed by Big Oil and Big Auto. The opportunity here, while the big boys are down, is to rebuild the genuine, local commercial infrastructure. To make shoes, clothes, food, education, healthcare and everything else we can in a bottom-up fashion.

Read all of Douglas Rushkoff's post.

Al:

A few months back you wrote about the dynamics of the 1932 FDR campaign and compared it to potentially the 2008 Obama campaign. You didn't elaborate further but just said that the same pieces may come together.  Can you elaborate in more detail on how you see this year in comparison to 1932?

Based on my research and study, traditional Republican urban strongholds like Indianapolis flipped for FDR for the first time.  To quote from "the Lean Years" written by Irving Bernstein, FDR won on the basis of urban workers and coal miners.  Maybe this years vote instead of coal miners will be the urban Hispanics.

Looking at Obama's primary victories, Obama obviously has the urban vote organized for GOTV activity for the general election.

I am with Al this looks very off to me. Also these numbers are old from Sept 7-9, almost 10 days.

I took a look at those ARG numbers, and while they can be a useful benchmark, I have to question a couple of the results. Illinois, for instance. Obama is up only narrowly there, and while it is true that Kerry didn't win by that much, Obama's home state effect should theoretically be pushing up his numbers there. I just don't see this one all that close.

 

I generally think that the Obama team is great in terms of strategy, but I think they made a huge mistake by ignoring West Virginia. They were probably basing their decision to ignore WV on the fact that they suffered one of their worst primary losses there. I probably would have written it off, too. But now we have 3 separate polls showing a 5 point race or less, and I have to wonder if a little Biden/Clinton effort might not make it even closer.

 

Plus, if Obama starts advertising there, he can utilize WV's cheap media markets to penetrate into southern Ohio and parts of PA. I think this is the most important point to realize, and I think Obama should spend a day or two there - WV used to be Democratic, and with Byrd's help, it could go blue.

 

To me, it makes a hell of a lot more sense than trying to flip Georgia, but I'm just an armchair strategist.

RedRiver - In my analysis what really put FDR over the top in the 1932 election was the surge of immigrants and their children onto the voting roles: the Irish, Italian, German, Dutch, Russian (many of them Jews), who had been discriminated against by the white Protestants (whose backing of alcohol prohibition was largely driven by anti-immigrant sentiment; it was considered a "dirty" habit by "dirty" people). FDR's call at the 1932 convention, reversing his prohibitionist stance, and saying "this convention wants repeal! Your candidate wants repeal!" was the second most driving factor in bringing those groups into the coalition (the first being the economic chaos from the crash of '29). And FDR's friendly stance toward African-Americans made it a multi-racial coalition.

This year three, maybe four, states are newly in play specifically because of nationalized immigrants and their children coming in the door to vote in higher numbers: CO, NM, NV and maybe FL. Add to that African-Americans voting in record numbers, and the success Obama is having with Asian-Americans and again, also with young "creative class" Caucasians, today, we see the development of a multi-racial coalition fueled by economic hardship, too.

FDR, simply put, enlarged the voter pool significantly enough to remake the map. Sound familiar?

Obama just delivered the line of the campaign in Elko Nevada.

"John McCain wants to take on the Old Boys network. The Old Boys Network!? In the McCain campaign, that's called 'a staff meeting'"  

The Big O is on fire!

 

The McCain camp would call SNL sexist?

Never saw that one coming!

...posted above, to see the fracture lines in the GOP coalition that this message, if Obama keeps pushing it, will blow wide open.

And now [McCain] tells us that he's the one who's gonna' to take on the old boys network. The old boys network? In the McCain campaign that's called a staff meeting. Come, on!

Perfect. More like this, Barack!

In a perfect world, I would expect that Obama would pick up 110% of those votes, if the poll is accurate :D

 

Al, please elaborate on why you consider it an outlier? This is not a rhetorical question,  I am genuinely curious, as statistics are not one of my strong suits.

 

Also, reflecting back on your previous blog post about 527s. What are the chances, that we will start seeing ads that not only connect  Obama to an issue, but also feature Nader quotations? Such ads would target certain demographics, maybe on cable, perhaps aired in college towns on the radio. I wouldn't put anything past desperate rethuglicans - and yes, I do mean them possibly helping to finance such ads. Please note that this is not  chicken littering BTW (it often seems to be necessary to throw that qualifier in on this blog, when voicing concerns),  just pondering over possible "next moves". Although why I ponder is another question, I guess I enjoy the exercise, as I am sure there are  heads that are way better than mine actually working for Obama, who spend their days pondering.

 

 

Cook County Girl - Please do use my post on surrogates - But please proofread and correct.

Doing is the salve for the days we feel down.

Obama was fabulous today, absolutely fabulous. And we can be, too.

Roman O - And "outlier" is a poll whose data differs radically from other polls of the same public (in this case, Michigan). If you look at the long list of Michigan polls measuring the general election, Nader doesn't break 3 points in any since one in April (during the most bitter part of the Obama v. Clinton primaries) when Nader hit 8 points.

Not all those polls seem to have measured third party candidates, but the ones that do paint a very different picture than the poll you cite. That's what makes it an "outlier."

 

As Al knows, I have had way too much economics training. I am a fiscal conservative, hence a registered Republican since I was 18. Till this year - switched that registration for the first time ever to vote for Senator Obama in the Utah primaries (however, have not been able to vote Republican on national ticket for about a decade).

It is VERY worth pointing out to voters this year a couple of economic things because, as some know, I have been harping on the fact that It is always the Economy when it comes to Presidential elections. Barring an attack on American soil, the economics decide the winner.

Pointing out to voters that a) Nothing in the last 7 years even closely resembles fiscal conservatism and b) the statistical Fact that the middle class is shrinking are important for any presidential campaign. The middle class and small/medium businesses are the primary economic engines of this country and the stability of a large middle class is also key in ongoing political stability. To have it shrink is frightening to me and probably to anyone willing to pay attention to this important issue.

So, here's to the Obama campaign keeping up the econ message. It is the winner.

Great Ad in Penn. That's the right stuff!

 

Today on Wall Street a vote of no confidence on this economy.

Dow down  by 453 pts, loss of 4.1%.

Al, thanks for the explanation. I noticed on that page you linked to, that under CNN/TIME, they don't have a percentage for Nader, they only have a percentage in the "undecideds" column. So that is the data from question 2/2a in the PDF I linked to, not 3/3a, which the associated press mentioned.

Al, thanks for the explanation. I noticed on that page you linked to, that under CNN/TIME, they don't have a percentage for Nader, they only have a percentage in the "undecideds" column. So that is the data from question 2/2a in the PDF I linked to, not 3/3a, which the associated press mentioned.

 

 

(previous send/post,  I forgot to enter moniker)

Indeed, I was one of the voters that supported Nader in 2000--but I did not vote for him, because I am in Florida.  I voted for Gore.

The NAFTA sell-out was a big issue for me, as the Iraq war was in 2004, when I voted for Kerry.

I despise the two-party duopoloy, but we can see jus how bad the corporate prefered party is when they are given the credit card and they find the key to dad's weapons safe.

In 2000 and 2004 I did not support either Democrat with any enthusiasm.  Barack Obama is someone I can admire and support with vigor--with my time and money even.

As far as 'capitalism' is concerned--to me its core logic is totally diseased, and it will come to an end at some point because of nuclear war, or ecological ruin.

I prefer not to involve my self in the dogmatisms of capitalism or socialism.  A mix of both (hat tip to Northern European nations) is most likely the most practical and effective at this juncture.   Benjamin above illustrates what people-power, grass roots economics can look like.

What we have in the US today is a mass herding operation that configures the population into dumbed-down, alienated wage slaves.  The population has become depoliticized and lazy--and the elites become ever more effete, delusional, selfish, and undemocratic in their spirit.

We are developing our farm on small scale, ecological principles that are rooted in notions of mutual-aid.   Our few workers are like family--and nobody that proves their worth is thrown under the bus when crisis happens.  Together we will rise or fall.

What is missing from the US at this juncture is this notion of mutual aid, caring that the kids across town can attend an excellent school, giving a damn if the old lady down the street can make ends meet, access quality medical care, etc.

With out this 'socialist' element, this will never become a strong and healthy nation.  The best we can hope for is what we have: a savage imperialist nation that produces throw-away people and products, a nation that is on the way down because there are no larger collective goals beyond getting the jet-ski, or stuffing oneself with all-you-can-eat ribs, etc.

The extremists and the cowards have been leading the US population toward the abyss--by spreading a trail of second-rate action movies, imported, cheap products from China, and genetically modified, mass produced chicken Mcnuggets.  As people scrample to retreive these trinkets and stuff their pockets, they/we don't see the cliff....

We can and must do better than this--Barack Obama exemplifies the spirit that we should call our own as we pick up the pieces, reasses where we are at, and develop a better way toward a more sane and healthy future.

If some would rather hang out at the racecar track and get drunk--this just means we have more work to do to show these fellow Americans a better, more enjoyable way.