Google Ads


Site Stats

SSP Daily Digest: 5/13

by: Crisitunity

Wed May 13, 2009 at 2:12 PM EDT


• IL-Sen: Tempted by Lisa Madigan's titanic poll numbers against all comers, and her public statement of reconsidering the Senate race, the DSCC has started actively courting Madigan to get into the Senate race. This news comes from Madigan herself, who still maintains that her main focus is the governor's race (but, if you read the fine print, seems to be firing warning shots across Chris Kennedy's bow to keep him from jumping into the Senate race). Madigan's interest can't be good news for Alexi Giannoulias, especially as concerns over his handling of the state college savings program are taking a bit of the bloom off his rose.

• FL-Sen: Movement conservatives are tying themselves in knots trying to decide how to react to apostate Charlie Crist's entry into the Senate race in Florida. The Club for Growth gave a tepid reaction, saying that Crist can still redeem himself by opposing the tax hikes proposed in the new state budget. On the other hand, Grover Norquist, the CfG's patron saint, sounded a note of realpolitik, saying that Crist may be the best candidate "in Florida." The conservative blogosphere, however, isn't giving an inch, trying to organize a boycott on giving funds to the NRSC after John Cornyn weighed in on Crist's behalf.

• MN-Sen: Norm Coleman is getting buried under legal bills, and not all of them are related to his tiresome contesting of Al Franken's election. He just requested for FEC permission to start tapping his campaign funds for defense attorney fees related to allegations that sketchy Coleman benefactor Nasser Kazeminy was funneling payouts to Coleman through Coleman's wife. Would GOP donors be willing to keep funding Coleman if they knew their donations were going to his defense attorneys and not the futile Franken fight? That hasn't stopped Coleman's Senate friends from continuing to solicit donations for him, as compiled in this video.

• MO-Sen: Rep. Roy Blunt pulled down a couple of expected but important endorsements in his quest to become Missouri's next Senator: Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, the last member of Missouri's House Republicans to get behind him, and Sen. Kit Bond, whose seat Blunt is looking to fill.

• OH-15: Ohio voters may get the chance to add even more Steves to their House delegation. Former GOP state Sen. Steve Stivers, who narrowly lost the open seat race in OH-15 to Mary Jo Kilroy last year, is contemplating another shot at the race, with lots of urging from John Boehner. (Ex-Rep. Steve Chabot is already committed to a rematch against Rep. Steve Driehaus in nearby OH-01.)

• SC-02: Speaking of rematches, backbench GOP Rep. Joe Wilson will have to face off again versus Iraq vet Rob Miller, who held Wilson to a surprising 54-46 margin in 2008 without DCCC help. Miller should be able to count on a higher-profile run this time.

• Mayors: City councilor Jim Suttle squeaked past Republican Hal Daub (former mayor and Representative) to hold the open Omaha mayor's seat for Democrats. (The position is officially nonpartisan, but the race was fought along clearly partisan lines, which favored Suttle as Democrats hold a 44-33 registration edge within the city.) Suttle won by 1,500 votes, by a 51-49 margin.
Crisitunity :: SSP Daily Digest: 5/13
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

SSP Daily Digest: 5/13 | 147 comments
NH-Sen via Teagan
"A new Dartmouth College poll shows Rep. Paul Hodes (D-NH) narrowly beating two Republican opponents in next year's U.S. Senate race in New Hampshire.

Hodes edges former Rep. Charlie Bass (R-NH), 31% to 30% with 39% undecided, and tops former Sen. John Sununu (R-NH), 38% to 35% with 27% undecided."

Sununu looks DOA.  

Bass is DOA too
Hodes already won that match once, by a significant amount.  Sure, in a statewide contest Bass gets the benefit of the slightly less Dem 2nd district voting as well, but he would still have to hold Hodes down in the 1st district to be competitive statewide and I don't see that happening.

I doubt either Bass or Sununu runs, knowing they're going to get rolled.

I think it's likely we see some state legislator or political aide be the sacrificial GOP lamb here.  Hodes wins by at least 10%.

[ Parent ]
Seriously?
I was under the assumption Sununu was almost guaranteed to run, and lose again.
[ Parent ]
I think pride will keep him out
He lost by 7% last year.  Why does he think Hodes will be any easier?  Especially now that he's lost the advantage of incumbency.  I think Sununu will not be convinced into wasting two years of his life simply slowing Hodes down, no matter how much the NRSC begs him.
[ Parent ]
The guy is seriously delusional
He didn't even try to hide his ultra conservative voting record in 2008.  At least people like Gordon Smith actually pretended to be moderate, unlike Sununu.  And he's learned nothign from his beat down in 2008.  He's been publicly bashing Obama's stimulus, budget, etc. as well as attacking the NH push for marriage equality.  

He strikes me as definately being stupid enough to run again, and do so on the same platform.  A platform so far right it only works in placesl ike Oklahoma or South Carolina.

[ Parent ]
NH is a fiscally conservative state
So I can see NH voters not being terribly upset over his criticisms on Obama's budget and stimulus and some other fiscal issues. But attacking gay marriage? Perhaps most NH folks are against it, I dont know, but I would assume even many who are against it dont want it being attacked. Theyd rather just have everyone 'shut up' about social issues.
[ Parent ]
particularly in New Hampshire
They are libertarian by nature.  What's Ron Paul's excuse for being pro-life?
[ Parent ]
From what i know
He use to be pro-choice (though maybe pro-life before that) and then switched to being pro-life in the 90s i think it was.
[ Parent ]
Hodes isn't a former Governor
Of course he should be "easier", but now Sununu is not an incumbent so he is easier too.  The same 7% outcome is most likely, but if you don't have anything else to do, might as well give it a shot.
[ Parent ]
I think Sununu does think Hodes will be easier
And, at the risk of touching off a war here, compared to the moderate politics but electoral powerhouse that is Jeanne Shaheen, I think he's right.  Now, I fully expect Hodes to win, but he's not Shaheen.  Ideologically and on the stump, he might be even better, but otherwise, she was an amazing get.

30, male, Democratic, CO-01
[ Parent ]
Shaheen was a repeat candidate
who was out of politics for six full years.  Still a strong candidate, but I wasn't optimistic at first that voters there had changed their minds that much on Sununu vs. Shaheen since 2002.  Obviously, they had.
[ Parent ]
Wrong congressional districts, skaje
The NH-2nd is the more Democratic district, and that is the one Hodes represents. NH-1 is less Democratic (maybe because of Manchester?), but I believe Sununu even lost that against Shaheen last year.
[ Parent ]
Not because of Manchester
although Manchester is more Republican than most cities of it's size, but because of the towns between Manchester and Portsmouth like Derry which are VERY Republican.


Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
Right you are
I swapped the districts in my post.
[ Parent ]
I Wonder How....
Norm Coleman feels now that his political career is officially on welfare, since he seems to be no longer self sustaining it financially. Kind of ironic since Republicans are usually anti-welfare, but it's not surprising since they seem to be backtracking on a lot of their core beliefs these last few years (i.e. massive gov't spending, ownership of corporations, etc...)
Beautiful!
[ Parent ]
Omaha race a replay of Obama-McCain '08
Dem wins by an inch.  

20 years old, male, GA-12 (home), GA-10 (school); previously lived in CA-29, CA-28, CA-23, IL-06, IL-14, GA-01.
We need to do some serious party-building in Omaha and Lincoln
I was quite happy that Obama decided to put effort into NE-02 (where Omaha is based) but I was a bit puzzled as to why he didn't bother putting money into NE-01 (Lincoln and some outlying areas) which is almost as Democratic as NE-02 (by putting up the infrastructure in NE-01, Obama could've probably made it a lot closer than it turned out).

Politics and Other Random Topics

24, Male, Democrat, NM-01, Chairman of the Atheist Caucus, and Majority Leader of the "Going to Hell" caucus!

[ Parent ]
Agreed
Those cities are trending Democratic, and while I'm not naive enough to suggest they'll put the state in play they could well open up some congressional seats for us down the line.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
They might also allow a credible Senate run
Let's face it, Nelson is the best we're likely to get at the moment, but I think we'd all like to do better. Build the Democratic base percentage a few points more in NE-01 and NE-02 and we might be able to absorb enough of the drubbing we'll always get in NE-03 to put a slightly less conservative senator into Nebraska's other seat.
[ Parent ]
And it can be done for relatively little money
Nebraskans (and Kansans of the non-megachurch variety) are conservatives but of the non-loon variety.  I could see a situation in 2012 where Obama still loses the state by a healthy majority, but eeks out wins in two of the three congressional districts.  
[ Parent ]
Where does Mayor Fahey go now?
Wikipedia (I know a real reliable source) suggested he didn't seek re-election because he was interested in the congressional seat. Anyone know if there is any truth to this?

Also, Hal Daub seems like damaged goods now, after losing 2 senate races (1 in a primary) and the Mayor's race this year.

Wikipedia also mentions Dems took control of the City Council last night (yay!)

26, Male, Democrat, TX-26

[ Parent ]
huge victory, cause Daub
was a strong candidate and taking the City council was big too.

I'm hoping the DCCC gets Fahey into the race against Lee Terry in order to keep his profile up for a 2014 guvernaotiral run, (with Scott Kleeb at LG hopefully).

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus

[ Parent ]
NICE!
Very good call of how that needs to go.  Kleeb just needs a boost since it's Nebraska, it's been just a Republican hellhole, we have no shot.  Obama proved we can be competitive.  Kleeb just needs a leg up and be able to do some stuff and put him in the spotlight a little too.  We Kleeb can be Gov then, Daub can run for Senate, probably lose but whatever.  Kleeb can run for Gov and then take over for Nelson.

Nebraska has had many Dem Senators, last 11 elections 7 have been won by Democrats IIRC.

[ Parent ]
Obama did much better in Omaha
NE-2 contains a lot of suburban Omaha, which is much more Repub than the city.
[ Parent ]
DSCC in Illinois
The DSCC shouldn't be trying to get Madigan into the Senate race. Any credible Democrat could beat Burris in the primary and win the general. They should let Madigan run for governor and Giannoulias run for Senate.

26, male, Dem, NJ-12
Last I checked
Illinois had a good Governor in Quinn.
[ Parent ]
What's Madigan's record like?
I know her family is prominent in Illinois and she went after Blago but that's it.  Could someone bring me up to speed???

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
Democrats will easily hold every office in IL
All this Kirk nonsense was started over the belief that Burris might actually be the nominee next year.  With anyone else, we win the races by at least 10%.  I don't see any need to primary Quinn for governor.  As for the open Senate seat, I like Giannoulias, but Madigan seems fine too.  Or Schakowsky.  I dunno.  If they're all equally progressive it might be nice to up the number of women in the Senate (as they're expected to lose KBH in Texas).
[ Parent ]
Schakowsky's the most progressive
I think Schakowsky's the most progressive of the candidates by a mile (top ten progressive in the House if one doesn't count recently elected freshmen), but she is dogged by her husband's alleged ethical misdeeds. I'm not an Illinois resident, but frankly I'm not sure I care what a politicians spouse does as long as it doesn't interfere with said spouse's legal dealings.

30, male, Democratic, CO-01
[ Parent ]
the jobs of Gov. and senator
are like apples and oranges.
Madigan can choose:
Do I want to be a chief executive or a legislator?
Do I want to live where I work (in a mansion no less), or do I want to have to fly continuously between DC & IL?
She's in a great spot to do as she wishes.

I'm hoping she picks Gov. It's just unfortunate her opponent now would be Quinn (who seems to be OK) rather than Blagojevich (who she'd been planning to run against for years).

Oh, and if she has presidential or VP aspirations, I still feel being Gov. is a better spot to be in (despite the big three 2008 POTUS candidates being Senators).

[ Parent ]
Yes
But the advantage of Senate is no term-limits.  Plus the D.C. social scene is popular with many.  I'll bet that is one of the reasons Crist jumped at the chance of becoming Senator.
[ Parent ]
IIRC, IL Gov. has no term limits
They usually get arrested and go to jail.
[ Parent ]
hahahahaha
that really made me laugh.  

I think Madigan should kind of go for the Senate now.  She could certainly run for Senate  

[ Parent ]
LOLOL!!!


My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
i'd rahter have her as governor
though I'm not sure she could be counted to make the reform and clean government needed to allow Democrats to take overwhelming control of Illinois.

Call no man happy until he is dead-Aeschylus
[ Parent ]
In this economy
I'd rather be a Senator.  Governors are getting tossed into the microwave across the country, regardless of party.
[ Parent ]
If she has Pres. aspirations
I think Sen. is the better way to go. IL state politics is just so corrupt. Not saying she will be but who knows what the voters might think.  
[ Parent ]
Especially since 2016 is likely not an option
Another Prez from Illinois in 2016?  Not too likely.  2020 or 2024, more likely.  In which case, Senate leadership could be a possible jumping off point.
[ Parent ]
And she's not too old
She'd only be 54 in 2020, which is how old Bush was in 2000 (not that comparisons to Bush are generally good, but in this case...).

22, Democrat, AZ-01
Peace. Love. Gabby.
[ Parent ]
Yeah
Barack is 47.  Hillary is 61.  She could two run two times in a row if need be or wait even longer, or switch to Gov at some point too down the road.
[ Parent ]
Lonegan is advertising against Chris Christie and Corzine
on broadcast TV in the New York DMA. He's running as a "real conservative" against income tax.

It would be awesome if he won the Republican primary.

I just want to say something
I first started regular posting here at the height of the primary wars when MyDD and Kos became unreadable. I have just been reading through some of the comments at Kos. Particularly, with regard to the decision to withold release of the torture photographs. It is sad to say that I am now experiencing similar feelings to this time last year. To say I was horrified with some of the comments would be an understatement. What are they thinking? I can only feel their hatred of Bush/Cheney et al is clouding their judgment. They cannot see the wood for the trees. Basically, I just wanted to get that off my chest on my return to grownup country. It is a true pleasure to be part of this community. Thank you. That is all.  
I avoid certain diaries altogether at Kos
Especially the countless diaries bashing Obama, Bush and everyone else under the sun on interragations.  They just cannot leave the past behind them and focus on the future.  Really, it's getting almost as bad as things were during the 2008 primary season at Daily Kos and MyDD.
[ Parent ]
Dailykos is approaching 1/4 million registered user ID's
It's the most visible liberal Dem. site by a mile.
I have been thinking for a while that there is some sophisticated conservative trolling going on there for sometime now.  Working to undermine when possible with fake extreme comments and other techniques (and see? it worked on you).

Unfortunately, actually running his site seems to be low on Kos's priorities in recent times.
The Hide Ratings can get rid of the most obnoxious adolescent trolls, but otherwise shouldn't be difficult to avoid if one chooses.
Just my 2¢.

[ Parent ]
I wouldn't be surprised
With Markos' profile getting higher and higher (not to mention his growing family), his attention is elsewhere, thus giving an opening to hijacking by trolls. Too bad he doesn't have any second-in-command who can take over when he is called away.

[ Parent ]
I know DailyKos is a big site
But I wouldnt think itd be that hard to find someone. Or a couple or few people to split the duties. But I cant say I go over there all the time.

And it does seem that many go overboard with their criticism of Dem leaders, such as Obama. Theres such a thing as healthy criticism (which everyone should do for anyone who deserves it, rather than stay silent just because you dont want to criticize 'your side') and also such a thing as just going overboard. Unfortunately many will go overboard.  

[ Parent ]
I don't mean this is a really negative way, but this is ignorant.
He has a second-in-command: he pays SusanG a full-time salary, and her title is something like Managing Editor.

He actually has a paid staff of I think seven.  Hunter, and maybe BarbinMD, and ct (who is a tech guy and not really relevant to the concerns you've articulated here), and I'm not sure which are the others; David Waldman (aka Kagro X) probably is one.  

Anyway, the point is he does have a paid staff to help him manage the site.

The idea that the people who are concerned about torture are Republican (or any other variety) of trolls though is either funny or very alarming, I can't decide which.  Just goes to illustrate how anyone whose strongly-held opinions one can't even begin to understand can be more comfortably assumed to be operating in bad faith.  That's a lesson for whoever can take it.

28, gay guy, Democrat, CA-08

[ Parent ]
DailyKos has become addicted to outrage
They're outraged everyday about every little thing...their outrage clouds reality. In defense of kos, there were a lot of people there this afternoon who agreed with the President on not releasing the torture pictures. Judging by outrages past, they're probably taking a break for a day or two from the site to let the outrage die down.

If it's not the torture photos, it's the defeat of the Sanders amendment to the credit card bill, which, if you listen to kossacks somehow means the defeat of the entire bill, which is untrue.

I don't pay attention to any of them anymore...I just observe and move on.


Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
Well now wait a minute.
Some of those things, especially the torture photos, are things worth being outraged about.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
Maybe for you
but outraged enough for every diary on the rec list to be about the same thing?

but I, frankly, couldn't care less...and honestly, I have friends in Afghanistan, so if releasing the photos right now put them at risk, which it could, I'd rather they not be at risk.

Pakistan is ont he brink and I don't want this to be the trigger that sends it over the edge.

It is, in my view, not all that important. We already know what happened.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
On photos and outrage.
Outrage can be a very good thing, if it's harnassed and directed to promote positive change, and let's face it, there's still plenty to be outraged about.  I certainly agree that there are plenty to rant and fume without much thought or purpose, but we should be outraged when it comes to bad public policy as, in the end, that is what is most important.

That said, I hope you would care about something this big, and here's why.  In the last eight years this country has changed more than many of us care to think about.  Think about it, how many countries have their governments tapping phones, suspending habeas corpus, opening up secret prisons, waterboarding prisoners, and have a president ruling through "signing statements" and remain functioning democracies for very long without violent resistence?  You're right-we DO know what has happened, but as long as the true horror of what happened goes unseen, the likes of Dick Cheney will always be able to say it wasn't torture while repeating the garbage that revealing what was done will hurt the troops.  Showing that we have a commitment to ensuring these things never happen again and that justice is done will do more to improve relations in the Muslim world than any attempt to push it under the rug-an action that will show many people around the globe that there hopes placed in Obama and in America were ill founded.

My greatest fear is that Bush, Cheney, and their ilk were just a warning.  If we don't have a long, hard look in the mirror, if there is no justice brought, no true acknowledgement of the truth however horrible it might be, then someone much worse than all of them could well appear in due time, and however good things are under Obama we could soon face a very dark future.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com

[ Parent ]
Like I said, that didn't happen
when Spain and France swept their torturing past under the rug.

Everything President Bush did there, he did with the backing of the American people. As long as a huge swath of the public supports things like wireless wiretapping and torture, they'll happen, no matter who we put in jail.

Spain and France were able to move on because the public turned against torture and tyranny.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
What about the UK?
During the Pres. campaign i remember reading an article about how Obama's grandfather was tortured by the British military in Kenya. And that he certainly wasnt the only one. Were those kinds of things also swept under the rug?
[ Parent ]
For the most part, yes
I can't think of any situation where past criminal behavoir (torture, abuse) was prosecuted by a new government that came to power peacefully.

I guess Pinochet, but that took like 15 years.

You will notice that THAT is not the case with political corruption though.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
And ive read that the British arent (or werent) exactly nice
to the IRA during interrogations. Though i dont really know much about all that.  
[ Parent ]
Wouldn't surprise me
I hear the stories growing up, but I grew up near Rockaway, Queens, which was an IRA supporting stronghold

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
I'm not sure on specifics
I'm too young to have lived through the worst bits of the Troubles. I remember the Canary Wharf bombings in the early 1990s and seeing bomb disposal trucks around the garrison town I grew up in, and my girlfriend was very nearly in Omagh on the day of the bombings (luckily they decided to go to Derry instead).

And by the early 1990s the police were a little more under control. But in the 1970s and 1980s they were much further over the line. There were a number of cases of people convicted of bombings who were later exonerated (which the government fought, despite IRA informers fingering those who were actually responsible) - the Guildford Four, the Birmingham Six and the Maguire Seven spring to mind. I suspect there was probably police brutality going over the line then.

Then there were the Special Patrol Group in London - whose descendants, the Tactical Support Group, beat a bystander to death during the recent G20 protests - and the RUC in Northern Ireland, who functioned as an only slightly more civilised band of loyalists provos, just in uniforms. Then there were the provos on both sides, who in their own communities functioned as parallel police forces.

Then there were the military, although I don't know if they had a role in interrogations. I just know they made Northern Ireland's streets feel like occupied territory to the inhabitants, and then of course there's Bloody Sunday.

So yeah, I don't know the specifics too well, but there was more than enough chaos, bloodshed and bureaucracy for us to have done some pretty fucking appalling things there.

[ Parent ]
Purely on a practical note
Let's leave aside the ethics of releasing the photos or not for now.

I don't think it'll have much effect upon Afghanistan. Why? Because Afghanistan has very little in the way of infrastructure, so most of the population doesn't even have electricity, let alone TV. A not inconsiderable percentage of them don't even have access to clean water.

And much of the population is still going out and shooting at coalition soldiers. I don't think the photos would make a substantive difference there.

I'd say Pakistan is a broadly similar case, since most of the unrest is in the NWFP, which have only slightly better infrastructure than southern Afghanistan. And in the more developed central and eastern regions it may stir up some discontent, but frankly that's as likely to help Sharif as the terrorists.

The main impact, if there is one (and not having seen the photos, I don't know,) is likely to be upon the Arab street from Iraq westwards. That's the problem that needs to be considered.

[ Parent ]
I agree totally, BUT...
I also agree with what was said above... If you get outraged by EVERYTHING... Then nothing is really outrageous anymore... Its all the same.  
[ Parent ]
Same here. I have an extremely hard time caring
about the interrogations issue. Yes, we waterboarded captives. The prime targets of which were undisputed terrorist scum who took part in the murder and/or attempted murder of American civilians.

Pardon me for not shedding a tear for them. Frankly, the extent to which some Kossacks do weep for them is quite disturbing.  

[ Parent ]
Wow

[ Parent ]
The annoying posters on dKos
are really living in a different planet than most Americans, or for that matter most Democrats.  Most Americans and Democrats could really care less about the waterboarding, even if they oppose it in theory.  It is simply not a priority for them.

The difference between Dems and Repubs, is that Dem leaders like Obama get that.  The Repub leaders believe that their wingnut base represents the country.

[ Parent ]
Most people don't even oppose waterboarding
http://pollingreport.com/terro...

A recent CNN poll showed 50% supporting waterboarding and 46% opposed to using it on terrorists.

[ Parent ]
On this issue, I could not be any less interested
in what "most people think."

I'm actually pretty disgusted by your attitude on this.

[ Parent ]
I agree.
Torture is wrong no matter what. Having the Sean Hannity-esque attitude of "well it doesn't matter if we only do it to our enemies" doesn't make it any less wrong.
[ Parent ]
You have to be ruthless to defeat these "people"
I can bearely even call them people given what they do.  They are subhuman.  They seek to completely destroy civiliation by instituting phony religious dogma on the entire world.  You have to be ruthless and us any means necessary to defeat thee people.  I happen to be believe that tortur is acceptable, not only for information purposes but for punishment as well.
[ Parent ]
Well
I find it quite distressing that the progressives who rightly condemn Christian fundamentalism give a pass to Islamic fundamentalism.
[ Parent ]
It's a big problem
And why I'm consistent in advocating for both a crackdown against international Islamic extremism and a crackdown against Christian extremists domestically.
[ Parent ]
I think that's an unrelated red herring
But I'm just a terrorist lover, so what do I know?
[ Parent ]
It's not unelated
Christian and Muslim extremists have a lot more in common than they don't.  The only difference between the two is that the Christian extremists aren't yet desperate enough to strap bombs on themselves.  Though they may be in the future.
[ Parent ]
So that means that it's actually OK to torture?
Seriously, show your work.
[ Parent ]
You may hate what I'm going to say
but I would have no moral problems with torturing Rush Limbaugh, for example.
[ Parent ]
What would that accomplish?
I don't see what that would do except make a lot of conservatives very angry and afraid, and radicalise a lot of moderates. And I'm firmly opposed to a) giving conservatives the excuse they've been looking for to start firing wildly and b) making moderates into conservatives.

Treating speech opposed to your position as proscribed speech is a sure sign of autocracy. And autocracies have to expand their powers to stabilise themselves. Before you know it, we're phoning the Vietnamese for tips on how to prise off John McCain's toe-nails and Peter DeFazio is being waterboarded for voting against the administration one time too many.

I can understand wanting to deny Rush Limbaugh a platform. But torturing him for what he believes, when he doesn't actually advocate anything criminal? Even if you take into account his role in radicalising those to his right, such a move seems as counter-productive as it would be ineffective.

[ Parent ]
I'm not saying it would
nor am I even saying that it would be a good idea to torture Limbaugh.

What I am saying is that if Limbaugh was tortured, I wouldn't cry a tear or come to his defense.

[ Parent ]
Torture. Doesn't. WORK!
They waterboarded a man 183 times, for information of no clear military value. Western security services relying upon information obtained by torture (from both US and Arab authoritarian regimes) completely failed to capture any major Al-Qaeda leaders for about five years (whilst seizing god alone knows how many people then having to later admit that there's no evidence against them).

You know what the grand accomplishment of the Bush terror program has been? Making Khalid Sheikh Mohammed a figure who can arouse a measure of sympathy. How incompetent do you have to be to accomplish that?

Torture doesn't provide reliable information, it doesn't prevent new terrorists following in the place of the old, it is most likely to be inflicted upon the innocent, because they don't know the correct lie to tell and it's revolting to boot.

If you want to believe that torture provides reliable information, I'm saddened. I would have hoped you would have realised that 24 is fiction. If you think it's acceptable as punishment, I'm confused. Isn't that what you have legal punishments like imprisonment or the death penalty for?

Sorry if this comes across as berating you. It is berating you. I just find what you believe to be fucking terrifying, and thought I should share that with you. No personal animus, just the aforementioned terror.

[ Parent ]
I know that
As I've mentioned before, I support it more for punishment than intelligence gathering.  
[ Parent ]
And if an innocent person were tortured,
the government could just say sorry and move on.
[ Parent ]
Yes
And pay repairations if necessary.
[ Parent ]
What are the going reparations for 'genital slicing' these days?
Because if we're treating innocence in the normal sense, that we lack a reasonable hope of convicting them, there are shitloads of innocent prisoners, and those who were rendited (or whatever the verb is) to places like Morocco had some pretty terrible things done to them.

We could easily be talking a billion dollars. I don't think a bit of fairly meaningless punishment (jihadis assume they'll be tortured, because it's what they'd do in the same situation, so you aren't given them anything they aren't already prepared for) is really worth that much.

[ Parent ]
That's usually how it works


Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
Umm...8th Amendment anyone?
Thank God you don't get to make those decisions.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
We're not talking about American citizens here
but as much as I'd like to say we should go back to our founding principles, I don't believe some of those principles ever existed. If our founding fathers were so concerned about cruel and unusual punishment, they would have banned the death penalty.


Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
Not to mention
that whole slavery thing...
[ Parent ]
Union actions during the Civil War
Would be considered barbaric by today's standards. Including the burning of towns, executions of soldiers who refuse to fight, internment camps I think even as well. Amongst other things.
[ Parent ]
Probably yes
But there was NO precedent.  France had it (although Robbespierre initially opposed it before embracing it).  Britain had executions.  So did Italy despite Caesar Beccaria's great work.  Even if they did believe in no death penalty, there was no where to turn to look for how to do it.

30, male, Democratic, CO-01
[ Parent ]
That is a BS argument
KSM and all of his associates were powerful propaganda tools from the moment they were captured. The rabid fundamentalists are no less motivated if their guy is sitting in an air conditioned cell with cable and a view. These are not rational, thinking people we are dealing with. The outright lies and propaganda put forth by al Qaeda easily put Fox News to shame.

I have never claimed torture provides accurate information, and I support ending the policy. What I do not understand is the blood lust for what was done in the past, when it is neither practical nor important at this difficult time for our country. The left has an obsession with righteous symbolism, I understand, but at some point the cost is just not worth it.  

[ Parent ]
You're completely missing the point
Radical Islamic fundamentalists are not the relevant audience here. They aren't going to be terrified into submission and they aren't going to suddenly decide that America is OK and they're giving up jihad. They won't change, so dealing with them is a law enforcement and national security issue.

The Arab street, on the other hand? They do care. They're faced with two groups that they have no particular reason to feel warmly towards - America and terrorists. One side props up their unloved regimes, invades places and supports Israel. The other side wants to throw acid on their daughters if they go to school, to beat them if they listen to music and to blow up crowds of innocent people just to get a couple of Americans.

What is the consequence of us making KSM look like a victim? Yes, we push the Arab street away from us and towards the terrorists. This is just basic hearts and minds stuff. You do not, contrary to popular belief, get those things by wrenching someone's balls off.

I went on for a while there, so I won't address your second point fully, as I suspect we're both boring each other by now on this issue. I'll just say that what you call righteous symbolism, I call the proper exercise of the law according to long-standing precedent and clear statutes. And what you call a difficult time, I call a time for excuses that are no more convincing now than they were when Republicans were making them a couple of years back.

[ Parent ]
Blood lust?
Just think pragmatically: what's to protect our service members in the future from being tortured? There is nothing left; we have lost the moral high ground.
[ Parent ]
Nothing can stop that
If we never tortured a single extremist our servicemen would be in just as great of risk of enemy torture.  It's the nature of the enemy, just as it was the nature of the North Vietnamese and North Koreans to torture our people despite our treating their POW's reasonably well.  There has never been any real evidence that the opposition will reciprocate good treatment of prisoners.
[ Parent ]
Well
Most of our enemies aren't going to abide by the Geneva Convention or other things like that regardless of whether we have the high moral ground or not.
[ Parent ]
Well it's against the law
Torture is against the law, so whether you support it being legal or not, let's not take away from the fact that people clearly broke laws and caused international embarrassment to America.
[ Parent ]
Prosecution of torture is up to Justice Dept
and if they don't want to prosecute, they don't have to.  And in this case they shouldn't.
[ Parent ]
I didn't say they should or should not prosecute
What I said was that I think it's wrong to support torture by the American government when we've signed treaties agreeing not to do it. And I also do not believe it would be wise to withdraw from these treaties. Therefore, we should not torture.
[ Parent ]
This is America. We're better than them.
Most of us at least.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
Honestly
they're going to do that no matter what we do, which is why so many people are ambivilant about torture.

We lost the moral high ground decades ago.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
it doesn't have to work
you don't think all Americans who support torture support it because they think it works, do you? Many of them support it because it satisfies their post-9/11 bloodlust.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
So I'm gathering
Sorry, this is more an unwillingness to accept that fact than ignorance of it.
[ Parent ]
You obviously don't understand Muslim extremists.
They're not out to destroy civilization, most of them have political agendas that arise in retaliation against colonialism (which was around until quite recently if you think about it) the way the superpowers behaved towards their countries in the cold war, the establishment of Israel, and even the rule of many of the regimes in the Middle East.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
The Taliban explicitly aims
for the entire world to be ruled by sharia law. They proclaim this ad nauseum, it is not at all in doubt. They are James Dobson on every batshit crazy steroid known to man.  
[ Parent ]
The Taliban have no members outside Afghanistan or Pakistan
OK, maybe there are a couple on the other side of the Iranian border, but that's it. And their membership is heterogenous, and many of them are, like poorly educated religious conservatives everywhere, parochial in the extreme.

They may want to see the entire world ruled by sharia law, but nine out of ten couldn't even find America on a map.

[ Parent ]
Some do
Jeremiah Islamayiah seeks to create an Islamic state under sharia law including Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and Philippines.

Muslim extremists in Britain have explicitly said they wish to see Britain governed by Sharia Law.

I don't think groups like Hezbollah and Hamas aim to destroy civilization, but there are definitely Muslim extremists who do.


Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
Have you got a quote for the British groups?
Because whilst that might fit Abu Hamza, he represents a fraction of a fraction of British Muslims (who aren't exactly a massive group anyway - no more than a couple of million people).

Some Muslims here use Sharia law for contractual law, marriage disputes and the like, and some courts take sharia into account (and the Archbishop of Canterbury has called for this to be extended wider). Is this what you're referring to? Because whilst I have qualms abouts it, it's not Muslim extremism.

If it's something else, have you got a handy link? Because I figure it's something I ought to know about to stop me sounding silly.

[ Parent ]
Guys.
Enough. Please.
[ Parent ]
I'm not going to be as oblique as my friend andgarden is.
The reason that good people care about torture is not because of overwhelming concern for terrorists, or even any concern at all for terrorists, but rather overwhelming concern for our country, its identity, and its principles.  I'm not tribally motivated, and the reason that I'm emotionally invested in this country at all is that 1) it's made up of human beings, the vast majority of whom are uncorrupted, good people, and 2) this country is specifically and directly founded on an open-ended set of principles, that are meant to be defended and expanded throughout the forward passage of time, because they are good, and good for people.  And 3) because this country is damn powerful, and at this historical moment what happens inside it matters not only to those yet to be born inside it, but also to those yet to be born outside it.  Conserving and expanding what is good about America is a gift not only to future Americans, but to future humans the world over.

My motivations now explained, I evidently must explain to you that caring about torture is not a case of caring about terrorists, but rather a case of caring about the well-being of Americans, the lawful limits of the American state, the future adherence of the American state to anything resembling lawfulness, and the future adherence of the American people and state to anything resembling the principles we still claim, once actively stood for, and I hope still do and will stand for, defend, and advance going forward.  If America is going to continue to be a law-bound people capable of maintaining itself free and advancing the cause of freedom and justice in the world, then the fact that we flagrantly violated and de facto discarded the Geneva Conventions that we ourselves organized in 1949 has to be addressed, some way or other.  The Geneva Conventions and our own domestic laws were completely ignored and perverted by the last administration, and if you think that can just be ignored, or will just disappear if we ignore it, then you're deluding yourself.  This exists as precedent now, and whether or not it will be addressed or punished also will exist as precedent.  If unlawfulness by this administration turns out to carry no consequence at all, then I will bet you any sum of money on earth that unlawfulness on a similar or grander scale will happen again.  And people who care about the well-being of the future, and who have the foresight to see the damage this episode could do going forward, are trying to do something to mitigate it.

And you're calling them terrorist-lovers, and congratulating yourself for disliking them.

You just don't get it.

28, gay guy, Democrat, CA-08

[ Parent ]
Thank you!
I have trouble believing that I should be congratulating an individual merely for being a decent human being and a human being who cares about the basic principles this country was founded upon, but apparently I am doing so.  I also find it distressing that two of our most left-wing posters, with whom I agree a great deal, are two of SSPs leading cheerleaders for torture.  Perhaps it's IHateBush's underlying authoritarian leftist streak that I can't endorse that's causing this.  I don't know.  But anyone who has trouble referring to those we've waterboarded as people...I just really don't know what to say.

30, male, Democratic, CO-01
[ Parent ]
Seconded

[ Parent ]
Amen brother.
[ Parent ]
You don't think most Americans care if their country tortures or not?
[ Parent ]
I don't think they do, no
There was a CNN poll about a week or so ago about this that showed that half the country was ok with torture;

A new national poll indicates that most Americans don't want to see an investigation of Bush administration officials who authorized harsh interrogation techniques on suspected terrorists, even though most people think such procedures were forms of torture.
Six in ten people questioned in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey released Wednesday believe that some of the procedures, such as water boarding, were a form of torture, with 36 percent disagreeing.

But half the public approves of the Bush administration's decision to use of those techniques during the questioning of suspected terrorists, with 50 percent in approval and 46 percent opposed.

"Roughly one in five Americans believe those techniques were torture but nonetheless approve of the decision to use those procedures against suspected terrorists," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "That goes a long way toward explaining why a majority don't want to see former Bush officials investigated."

Fifty-seven percent of those questioned don't want Congress to investigate Bush officials who authorized those harsh interrogation procedures, with 42 percent calling for action by lawmakers. Fifty-five percent also don't want a similar investigation by an independent panel.

I'm from New York and in the years after 9/11 some of the comments I'd hear about what we should do with Muslims were abhorrant. There are many Americans out there who buy into the "24" belief and think it's ok that America tortures.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
I tend to agree
But I look at this from a different perspective, investigating this will suck up all of the political oxygen in the next two years, and Obama's agenda to prevent this country from going down the toilet will get little attention.

We are in an unprecedented crisis, and we have two options, save the country by making huge policy changes, or investigating the previous criminal regime.  You can't do both.  

[ Parent ]
It's a fluff issue
Red meat for the far left social libertarian wing of the party.  Alleged torture matter to me about as much as Bill Clinton getting a BJ in the White House mattered, meaning none at all.

I say let leave the past behind.  Bush, Cheney and Co. are currently no real threat.  Only if they start speaking out and making serious threats to the Obama Administration should they be arrested.

[ Parent ]
I'm of two minds on this
On the one hand, I agree that Obama should be focused on fixing the mess we're in and not be distracted by this. By the same token, I do believe that those who engineered this policy should be held accountable in some fashion if we truly are to be a nation of laws. That's why I like how Obama is leaving it up to Holder and the Justice Dept and is staying out of it. That is how it should be.

Personally, going after W himself is a fruitless effort. He was probably kept in the dark as often as possible on this (plausible deniability and all that). Plus, he lacks the intellectual faculties to pull off such a scheme.

Cheney is another matter. I say let him keep giving more rope to snag himself with and, once things reach critical mass, give the rope a good solid yank.  

[ Parent ]
Jesus fucking Christ
Torture investigations are "red meat for the far left social libertarian wing of the party"? Seriously?

Torture is just plain wrong. You can dress it up however you like to try and make yourself feel better, but if you're going to make value judgements on anything, torture being wrong ought to be one of them. It's wrong, it's stupid (all reliable sources note that it produces junk evidence, and the only notable counter-arguments are made by Dick shoots-people-in-the-face Cheney) and it shouldn't just be passed over in silence.

I really feel this is a basic "membership of the civilised world" issue. If America doesn't care enough about torture to punish those who enabled it and carried it out - and that includes the CIA officers, because following orders has not been a valid defence for 64 years, and it includes Bush, because the president is supposed to provide leadership - then it just won't feel like America to me anymore. And that would be sad. I used to like arguing the case that you really were a civilised country.

[ Parent ]
To clarify
I acknwledge that torture typically does not provide useful intelligence.  I'm in favor of it more for punishment than intelligence gathering.
[ Parent ]
And we cannot prosecute CIA officers
It's simply not feasible.  They work for us now and we need their trust to carry out what we need them to do.
[ Parent ]
We prosecuted at Abu Ghraib
Haditha too, although that one seems to have failed due to lack of reliable evidence.

The CIA is, like the army, a military organisation. They're trained professionals. If they stepped over the line, sanctions should be taken.

Not taking sanctions and treating them like a protected category is, I'd argue, actually extremely dangerous. The intelligence services have a greater duty of loyalty to the nation than the nation has a duty of loyalty to the intelligence services. If that principle isn't followed, you're setting yourself up for agents freelancing, possible collusion with foreign powers and attempts to interfere with domestic politics. And the CIA is political enough anyway. I'd argue you need to clip its wings.

At a minimum, those who participated in torture ought to face professional sanctions and those who agitated for it should be dishonourably discharged. But really, I think you need to get the courts involved. If you act like the intelligence services are above the law, they will act like they're above the law. And that's another step on the way to banana-republic territory.

[ Parent ]
At Abu Ghraib
We prosecuted low level soldiers.  An act which was despicable.  These soldiers were following orders from higher up and should have been commended for their service rather than dishonorably discharged and thrown in jail.

And the military actually is independent of normal law.  They have their own military court system.

[ Parent ]
We can't do both?
Oh come now.  Do you REALLY think Congress would be involved?  Obama?  The only people it would take to get this done and done right are Eric Holder and his minions at Justice and, maybe, a special prosecutor.  Two parallel tracks.  No overlap at all.  As for taking away political oxygen, I think you'd be surprised at how many people want this, and at the likelihood of the American people to separate the two.  But, at base, that shouldn't matter.  What should is that we are a nation of laws, period.

30, male, Democratic, CO-01
[ Parent ]
I do have to say
As far as political captial is concerned, now is the best time to do it. Obama is wildly popular and the GOP and the former Bush admin. wildly unpopular. Yes in a couple years there might be more votes in Congress, as well as maybe not worrying about health care reform (if its already passed) but I dont think Obama and the Dems will have nearly the political capital then as they do now. Although many voters do seem to be in a 'lets just move on' mode. Although that attitude may not be any different in a couple or few years.
[ Parent ]
'Just move on' is an initial reaction
To some extent, it's a wish not to have to find out what was done.

I don't think such an attitude is set in stone. When evidence of high crimes and misdemeanours is found and when evidence emerges that the president knowingly involved himself in such (and I believe that if a search is made, it will very definitely be a question of when, not if) then there is likely to be a groundswell of anger. Just like Watergate.

Nobody wants to know how the sausage is made, but when knowledge of malfeasance goes from a rough suspicion to a clear and indisputable fact, people don't want to move on. They want to get angry and get justice.

[ Parent ]
But remember that Watergate occured
while Nixon was still in power. Bush is out of power and so is his party.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
If gross violations of human rights occured
I do think it should be looked into. I dont think we can say to countries like Serbia, 'you need to hold past leaders accountable' while not doing the same here. We would lose alot of credibility internationally.  
[ Parent ]
I don't understand why this is even a question
To those who would wish to leave the previous administration alone, I'm curious.  Would you have/Did you support the Watergate investigations?  Seems to me that this is a FAR grosser violation of human rights, and I don't know many non-conservative Republicans who don't think investigating Watergate was a good idea.

30, male, Democratic, CO-01
[ Parent ]
'Twas ever thus
The Watergate investigation wasn't pushed heavily by Senate Democrats. They got up to speed when it became apparent they couldn't vacillate any longer, as the public was beginning to turn against Nixon and they had to too.

But what about the Contras? There there is much less support for the investigation, and it was never pushed as aggressively as it should have been. It took an independent counsel to indict Weinberger.

People realise that investigating obvious violations of the law is a good idea when it's too late to turn back. Before then, many people are scared to look. And that's even without America's ambivalence towards torture.

[ Parent ]
I dont want to compare any
But I think its a similar reaction, in the past few decades, to certain foreign countrys' reactions to investigating human rights violations in their own country. Many people there just simply 'dont want to know the full extent of what happened'. Whether because of guilt or pride or whatever. So I dont think its an American trait, really.
[ Parent ]
It's important to remember
that while I've seen some people applaud Spain and France for taking a strong stance against torture...the Spanish even considered indicting Bush administration officials...what did they do in response to torturers in their country? How many Franco confidents went to jail in Spain? What did France do about those who tortured Algerians?

Nothing.

It's not an American trait to be ambivilant to these things, it's a human trait and just because Americans don't seem to want to prosecute the past, does not automatically mean we are doomed to a future of torture and tyranny (see France, Spain)


Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
Wait, what?
By that logic, it was hypocritical of the United States to protest apartheid in South Africa.
[ Parent ]
I always felt it was, yes
The only difference I saw is that we at least worked to end our version of apartheid, but I did always feel we overreacted when it came to South Africa.

We didn't have the moral standing to criticize them.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
The point of being a progressive
is getting America to that moral high ground.

http://www.bluearkansasblog.com
[ Parent ]
I was under the impression
that it was to help the working class. I don't think we can ever get America to the moral high ground as long as we're a major world power.

Name a superpower in history that did stand on moral high ground?  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens

[ Parent ]
I guess we don't have the moral standing to criticize what is going on in Darfur either.
What, with the trail of tears and all.
[ Parent ]
No, not really lol
That's the problem with our meddling in international affairs, we don't have any moral credibility on these things.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
You have a very strange worldview.

[ Parent ]
which btw
brings me to the same point...Andrew Jackson presided over the only genocide in American history and he's on the $20 bill...so this sweeping bad behavior under the rug thing didn't start with Obama.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
I'm not about to defend the Spanish or French
But a bit of context is helpful here:

Franco died in 1975. The democratic government that followed was not dominated by those who'd suffered under him - in fact it had plenty who'd served under him. And in 1983 there was an attempted military coup when some in the army felt the left had become too strong, that was only stopped by King Juan Carlos personally intervening.

The situation in France was never quite as bad, but De Gaulle was never exactly a paragon of democracy. He never really lost the attitude that he was the colonel and France was his regiment, and that he could therefore carry out summary justice whenever he liked.

In neither of these cases was prosecution therefore really feasible. That's not to say the things that were done aren't widely abhorred now. When Le Pen was accused of torture during his time in Algiers a few years back, he responded with absolute outrage as it was perceived to decisively delegitimise him.

America's not in that state. The intelligence services may feel more independent than they once did, but they aren't about to threaten a coup. So whilst I accept that a wish to move on is fairly universal amongst those who've seen such things done in their name, I'd argue that it isn't an apples to oranges comparison - America could, if it wanted, act upon this.

[ Parent ]
But it doesn't HAVE to
That's my point.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
Come on
most of the people in Abu Ghraib were innocent bystanders being in the wrong place at the wrong time.  The army would literally just pick randoms, put them in jail for a few months, torture them and send them on their way.
[ Parent ]
Hear, Hear!
I used to be a semi-regular of both MyDD and DKos. I joined those sites (and SSP) right around January 2005. I had heard of blogs but never realized there were whole online communities of people who felt the same way I did about politics. SSP has been a joy because it provides clear-headed and thorough election analysis for free (as opposed to Roll Call which, in addition to having lousy analysis, is outrageously expensive). The first thing that bugged me about MyDD and DKos was all the carping about Diebold. Being from Ohio, I did not trust those machines at all, but not b/c of some vast conspiracy but b/c they did not work. Then, when election 2006 came and went, the Diebold freaks disintegrated. However, they were replaced by a borderline puritanical strain that threatened retribution against anyone who did not walk the line. Being the free-thinker that I am, I left both communities.

As bad as DKos can be, at least there were sane people around to try and keep things from getting out of control. MyDD has been in complete meltdown mode for more than a year. Sometime after Stoller and Bowers left (a departure I had welcomed because I disliked both of them), Armstrong started a jihad against Obama. Some of the things he wrote on the site were mind-boggling, and he gave free rein to any anti-Obama troll (including some obvious Republicans--Handsome Gent springs to mind). Last I heard, the site was on its last legs.

[ Parent ]
MyDD has been fairly reasonable on this
only one or two "Obama is a big disappointment" diaries. Comments have been more rational about the decision.  

Liberty Avenue Politics - a place for politics in Southern Queens
[ Parent ]
I have a different experience
Dkos has lots of good diaries on the front page and sometimes among the rec diaries.  But, I never read the comments.  I think that's why you and I have different perspectives.  I think the frong pagers are sometimes too leftist/partisan in attacks on Republicans, but thats all in good fun to me so no worries.  The front pagers are generally very pro-Obama and when they do criticize Obama, it's pretty measured IMHO.  I wouldn't want them to be complete Obama apologists anyway.  I think they're balancing things pretty well.  Just ignore the comments and you'll find reading over there much more enjoyable.
[ Parent ]
haha
I wondered why this diary had so many damn comments on it. lol Good ol' torture talk. To all my fellow nerds out there, all I will say is, "There are FOUR lights!!" If you know what that means, you know where I stand.
Best comment on the thread
To anyone still reading, I'm very disappointed in this thread. This is the Swing State Project. We talk about the horse race. Don't get me wrong - I consider torture a very important issue. Just. Not. Here.

The main reason why people come to this site is to geek out about polls. The reason people keep coming back is because it's a welcoming, civil place, free from all the holy wars that most other sites with decent traffic usually experience.

So, enough. Do not be this guy. Don't take the bait. Don't get sidetracked. There are a zillion-and-one sites for you to discuss pet issues. This site is for one topic only. We like it that way, and so do you.

[ Parent ]
Exactly.
That is why this is the political site I frequent the most. I enjoy talking about election numbers, and have for many years. I used to like talking about pet issues, but that has pretty much been worn out on me, as I find that, at least for me, the discussions accomplish nothing and make everyone angry. I just think, let's agree to disagree; we're not going to convince each other that our side is right.

My blog
Twitter
Scribd
28, New Democrat, Female, TX-03 (hometown CA-26)
[ Parent ]
wohoo!
Someone appreciates me! need for affection met And amen to Calitexas below... This is the ONLY site that I read comments on. Others sites annoy me.
[ Parent ]
blog comments too easily become like YouTube comments
quick, anonymous, and consequence-avoiding.

That's why sentiments are more inflamed in comments than on blog posts and diaries.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

[ Parent ]
Point taken
But David, there aren't so many spaces where we can do this civilly.  That's why I've stopped with MyDD and DailyKos.  Tone, not content.

30, male, Democratic, CO-01
[ Parent ]
SSP Daily Digest: 5/13 | 147 comments

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

About the Site

Publisher: DavidNYC

Senior Editor: James L.

Senior Editor: Crisitunity

Contributing Editor: Jeffmd

Search the SSP archives:

SSP Resources

Presidential Vote by CD

SSP Document Collection

Race Tracker Wiki

Dave's Redistricting App

Blogroll

Daily Kos Elections
DemConWatch
Five Thirty Eight
Governing
Hotline On Call
Political Wire
Pollster.com
Prop*50
Public Policy Polling
The Thicket
Powered by: SoapBlox