Bart,
The first point of my email was that we’re currently in the primary race,
NOT the general election. You chose not to respond to that point at all
so I thank you for your tacit admission (a la Colbert…)
Bart says: The season we’re in changes nothing.
Attacking Hillary with “That wench is evil” helps them when it counts.
As to Hillary leading in the race, it looks like you’re using a circular argument.
I suggested that the basis you offer for your support is that, according to polls,
she’s 20 points ahead. That information is obtained from a mainstream media
that lives to serve the neo-con agenda, though, so how do you know?
Bart says: She’s 20 points ahead in almost every national poll.
If we take “the whore press” too far, we never landed on the moon.
I’m saying the whore press can’t be trusted – completely.
You replied:
>I don’t think she’ll win because I was told that by somebody.
>I believe in science, math and logic.
>She’s ahead by 20 points…”
What’s your source? Are you suggesting that when it comes to the primaries, suddenly the media (and Gallup, et al) is honest and NOT working in the best interests of the GOP? Are you suggesting that the GOP wouldn’t try to shape the race by influencing who gets the Dem nomination?
Bart says: I think I answered that, but you couldn’t know till now.
I think HRC is their only lose-for-sure, so why would the MSM push her?
You wrote:
>Your position seems to be “all the polls are lying.”
>How do you defend that? “
Fortunately, I don’t have to defend that position because it’s not my position.
It would be illogical to speak to “all polls”…
Bart says: Picky, picky, picky.
She’s so far ahead, we don’t know who #2 is.
If you’re point is, “Maybe she’s not the front-runner,” good luck to ya.
However, several of your readers have written to point out that (admittedly informal) polls conducted by sites that cater to the “lefties” (that is, not working for the GOP) regularly show Hillary losing to other candidates. You dismiss them outright in favor of information obtained from some other (as yet unnamed) source. As you said, “I’m sorry things aren’t working out more to your liking, but it’s illogical to ignore the facts…”
Bart says: Damn, I sure hire you.
Kos showed her at 1 percent because Kos runs rigged polls.
He hides behind “I didn’t say it – they did,” but c’mon.
Our front-runner can’t beat “I don’t know” at Kos?
Who buys that bullshit?
Irony: When she gets sworn is – you watch – she’ll save a seat for Kos but not me.
You wrote:
“If someone wants to attack Hillary on the facts nobody can stop that, but
>Hilary is not even a Democrat.
>Bill Clinton’s greed was classic GOP.
>First Wench
is just horseshit – why do you fail to grasp the difference? ”
I never said any of those things. Why would you ascribe them to me
and what makes you think I “fail to grasp the difference?”
Bart says: Because that’s what you responded to.
I said, “Personal attacks against our front-runner hurt us”
and you chimed in to tell me how wrong I was.
Again, thanks for your time…
Bart says: As always, I enjoyed the tangle.
Thanks for the reply.
Everything that one Democrat slams another with during the primaries, the GOP will use against the eventuall winner of those primaries in the general election. They have done it before, they will do it again, over and over ad nauseum until we learn to not give them any ammunition in the first place.
I thought it was classic – and classy – when during the Jon Stewart interview, Big Dog didn’t say one bad thing about anybody. Once again, he’s showing us how to win this thing – are we going to pay attention this time?
Comment by Peregrin — September 26, 2007 @ 6:27 am
Regretfully the play nice in the primary strategy has gotten us nowhere in the last two elections. I’d rather we air our dirty laundry but make damn sure we unite after the convention. After all it doesn’t really matter what we call each other, the Grand Old Perverts party will be thinking of that and a bunch of new lies whomever gets the nod.
Comment by greyhawk — September 26, 2007 @ 7:34 am
Ok, listen, I swear to Koresh I’m not trying to be difficult. I, too, think it’s wrong for Dems to attack each other. (I live in CA and got to see the effects of that “strategery” close-up in the last gubernatorial election.) That was never the intent of my message and I don’t believe I’ve leveled any attacks at her.
I understand she’s the front-runner. How could she NOT be? She’s the main focus of regular coverage in the MSM and the others mostly get mentioned when they say something outrageous or attacking…or they don’t get mentioned at all…
I actually believe you summed up my issue best with the question, “I think HRC is their only lose-for-sure, so why would the MSM push her?”
Yes, why would the MSM push her? Perhaps they’re less concerned with what YOU think and more interested in what THEY think they can do to her in the general election…
In taking your response as a whole, it seems to me you’re suggesting Kos rigs his polls but Gallup plays it straight up. The nexus of these two ideas seems to be that the Kos poll doesn’t support the candidate you like and Gallup does…
Ok, just to sort-of “clean up”…
Bart wrote: “If we take “the whore press” too far, we never landed on the moon.”
That’s a rhetorical fallacy and I presume you know it. Just because the American MSM is corrupt, dishonest, and partisan today doesn’t mean they’ve always been so…
Finally, yes, you should hire me. I think clearly, write well, know HTML, and could use the income. (But I wouldn’t pass a pee test…)
Comment by macrobank — September 26, 2007 @ 8:13 am
Yes, you can take the “play nice” strategery too far, but that’s not the Clinton doctrine. He campaigns by political karate – let the other guy throw the first punch, and when he does, you take him down hard.
Comment by Peregrin — September 26, 2007 @ 9:56 am