View current page
...more recent posts
Sunday, Jan 11, 2004
rant a holic
pretty good explanation of the iowa caucus approach to deliberative democracy. i think could be a helpful tool for the democrats because lesser candidates supporters can if they choose move to support more popular candidates once their initial choice has been weeded out. but i could see that those campaigns with the best organization would have a decided advantage which might bias the results. so, theoretically, edwards supporters (about 10%) could tip the caucus if he is eliminated and his supporters decide that gephardt is their anybody but dean candidate.
meanwhile, this flap about dean dissing the iowa caucus four years ago is bullshit. unfortunately i saw him back away from it today. what he said was true, and his interlocuters if pressed would be forced to agree. its the same with his "we are no safer now" remark about saddam. but people can be remarkably obtuse. not that theyre entirely wrong about dean as the more i see the less impressed i am. he has two things in his favor, the movement and his willingness to occasionally speak truth to power. i cant say that he seems all that prepared to "run the country," especially with a howling opposition breathing down his back. if he thinks gentleman john f. kerry plays dirty wait until the conservatives and their nasties in the media dig in.
so, all of the blow dried members of congress are far smoother than dean. as has been stated elsewhere, dean has polled better with women despite his sort of gruff clinical demeanor. i would assume that has more to do with his "liberalism" and opposition to the war. because he should appeal to what are considered a valued block, middle class males. theres nothing sexy about dean. hes very matter of fact and his physical features and posture reflect that. by contrast i would say all of the members of congress possess a certain effeteness. i think that comes from living in the political hothouse and mediaspheric environment that is washington. which is why govenors can do well. their lack of polishcan actually be an asset. as with clark, his public persona is still somewhat clunky. although if maureen dowd mocks him, that should be a good indicator that people in the heartland might respect him. it actually reminds me of The Simple Life. the most interesting thing about the show is the image of middle america which is pretty much airbrushed from or for television. maybe you catch a glance of it here of there, especially if theres something to sensationalize for the news or newsmagazine/tabloid tv. but here is a family living in rural arkansas, more or less just getting by. but im guessing they would have to be fairly liberal minded to have agree to appear on the show. they are somewhat shocked and dismayed by the girls behavior but theyre just as intrigued and bemused at other times.
soooo, im placing them in the soft center. and i guess im playing my version of "who would you rather have a beer with," its "who would you feel most comfortable with in your living room?" now, is this the way to decide who should run the country? probably not, but it is often what it amounts to.
who do i think this family would vote for? i think the mother would vote for edwards and the father could go for clark. in a general election they might pull the lever for bush over dean at this point. nicole richie would vote for sharpton or the marijuana party candidate and paris hilton would either oversleep or vote for kucinich because she thought he was funny to look at.
whoops. lost track of time. missed john kerry on meet the press. i could really use that tivo. and a powerbook. an interior decorator. a trunk full of money.
caught a few minutes of the poobah roundtable on timmys show. they were all genuflecting to the power of the blog. russert even used the line, "are you now or have you ever been a blogger?"
end of rant