McSame, Myth of A Maverick Deconstructed In Numbers

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 10:24

One key to the McSame "Maverick" Myth is the incredible gap between the range of diversity in the two parties. The GOP is much more lock-step than the Democrats are, and as a result, McSame stands out as somewhat atypical in a way that he would not, if the Republicans were as diverse in their views as the Democrats are. This is not merely an qualitative observation on my part. It's something you can prove with cold, statistics. And that's just what I'll do on the flip, using Progressive Punch statistics.

Naturally, this sort of analysis is anathema to the Versailles media. For them, the balance myth is axiomatic. The notion that Democrats could be anything other than mirror images of the Republicans is not simply heresy, it's unthinkable. So, join me for a brief stroll through unthinkable land on the flip.

Paul Rosenberg :: McSame, Myth of A Maverick Deconstructed In Numbers

Party Differences in The Senate

The table below compares group statistics for the two parties in all the Progressive Punch categories, along with the overall score. Categories are sorted in ascending order of the difference in standard deviations (Dem minus Rep). Thus, the only two categories in which the Democrats have a smaller standard deviation come first. The standard deviation is the most basic statistical measure of how broadly or narrowly a group of statistical values is dispersed around a central value (the average in the table below). The fact that Republicans have a smaller standard deviation in almost all categories reflects a smaller dispersion of values, and thus, a greater uniformity in voting. As will be seen below, McCain seems like much more of a "maverick" compared to the uniformity of the GOP than he does when compared to the Democrats.

Progressive Punch Scores, U.S. Senate

Statistical Comparison Of Parties
Difference In Standard Deviation--Ascending
Party: Democrats Republicans Difference
Category High Low Range Mid Avg St Dev High Low Range Mid Avg St Dev Low Dem- High Rep High Low Range Mid Avg St Dev
Corp-Subs 100.0 35.7 64.3 67.9 80.5 18.8 76.5 0.0 76.5 38.2 16.1 21.2 -40.8 23.5 35.7 -12.2 29.6 64.5 -2.4
Env 100.0 47.4 52.6 73.7 84.9 13.6 64.5 0.0 64.5 32.2 14.8 15.4 -17.1 35.5 47.4 -11.8 41.5 70.1 -1.8
Overall 98.2 50.6 47.6 74.4 86.5 8.4 36.8 2.8 34.1 19.8 9.9 7.7 13.8 61.4 47.9 13.5 54.6 76.6 0.7
Aid 100.0 59.7 40.3 79.8 92.2 8.5 31.3 1.1 30.1 16.2 7.3 7.0 28.4 68.8 58.5 10.2 63.6 84.9 1.5
Health 100.0 58.1 41.9 79.0 92.7 9.5 28.0 0.0 28.0 14.0 5.9 6.8 30.1 72.0 58.1 14.0 65.1 86.8 2.7
Gov't-4-All 100.0 52.8 47.2 76.4 89.1 9.0 27.3 0.0 27.3 13.6 6.8 5.6 25.5 72.7 52.8 19.9 62.8 82.3 3.5
Fair Tax 100.0 49.2 50.8 74.6 91.4 9.7 23.8 0.0 23.8 11.9 4.2 5.3 25.4 76.2 49.2 27.1 62.7 87.1 4.5
Gov-v-Corp 100.0 35.5 64.6 67.7 84.6 13.5 35.5 0.9 34.5 18.2 9.7 8.4 0.0 64.6 34.5 30.0 49.6 74.8 5.1
War-Peace 100.0 53.9 46.2 76.9 87.1 10.6 21.8 0.0 21.8 10.9 3.9 5.4 32.1 78.2 53.9 24.4 66.0 83.2 5.2
Fam-Plan 100.0 12.5 87.5 56.3 81.2 19.1 62.5 0.0 62.5 31.3 5.1 13.7 -50.0 37.5 12.5 25.0 25.0 76.2 5.4
Hum-Rights 100.0 42.0 58.0 71.0 84.3 11.4 24.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 4.0 5.9 18.0 76.0 42.0 34.0 59.0 80.3 5.5
Labor 100.0 44.9 55.1 72.5 82.7 15.1 39.1 0.0 39.1 19.6 7.0 9.0 5.8 60.9 44.9 15.9 52.9 75.7 6.1
Justice 100.0 30.4 69.6 65.2 86.2 13.2 22.2 0.0 22.2 11.1 4.1 4.6 8.2 77.8 30.4 47.4 54.1 82.1 8.7
Ed-Hum-Art 100.0 0.0 100.0 50.0 88.1 21.2 16.7 0.0 16.7 8.3 2.6 3.8 -16.7 83.3 0.0 83.3 41.7 85.5 17.4
Housing 100.0 0.0 100.0 50.0 74.2 30.0 33.3 0.0 33.3 16.7 5.1 12.0 -33.3 66.7 0.0 66.7 33.3 69.1 18.1

For our purposes, it is both clearer and easier if we convert these scores to a common scale by inverting the Democratic scores (subtracting them from 100), which leaves the range and standard deviation unchanged, but maps the extreme highs of the Democrats onto a common scale with the extreme lows of the Republicans, and allows us to compare the "moderates" of both parties directly to one another. This is what the following table does:

Progressive Punch Scores, U.S. Senate

Statistical Comparison Of Parties
Difference In Standard Deviation--Ascending
Party: Inverse Of Democrats* Republicans Difference^
Category Low High Range Mid Avg St Dev High Low Range Mid Avg St Dev High Low Range Mid Avg St Dev
Corp-Subs 64.3 0.0 64.3 32.1 19.5 18.8 76.5 0.0 76.5 38.2 16.1 21.2 -12.2 0.0 -12.2 -6.1 3.4 -2.4
Env 52.6 0.0 52.6 26.3 15.1 13.6 64.5 0.0 64.5 32.2 14.8 15.4 -11.8 0.0 -11.8 -5.9 0.3 -1.8
Overall 49.4 1.8 47.6 25.6 13.5 8.4 36.8 2.8 34.1 19.8 9.9 7.7 12.5 -1.0 13.5 5.8 3.6 0.7
Aid 40.3 0.0 40.3 20.2 7.8 8.5 31.3 1.1 30.1 16.2 7.3 7.0 9.1 -1.1 10.2 4.0 0.6 1.5
Health 41.9 0.0 41.9 21.0 7.3 9.5 28.0 0.0 28.0 14.0 5.9 6.8 14.0 0.0 14.0 7.0 1.4 2.7
Gov't-4-All 47.2 0.0 47.2 23.6 10.9 9.0 27.3 0.0 27.3 13.6 6.8 5.6 19.9 0.0 19.9 10.0 4.1 3.5
Fair Tax 50.8 0.0 50.8 25.4 8.6 9.7 23.8 0.0 23.8 11.9 4.2 5.3 27.1 0.0 27.1 13.5 4.4 4.5
Gov-v-Corp 64.6 0.0 64.6 32.3 15.5 13.5 35.5 0.9 34.5 18.2 9.7 8.4 29.1 -0.9 30.0 14.1 5.7 5.1
War-Peace 46.2 0.0 46.2 23.1 12.9 10.6 21.8 0.0 21.8 10.9 3.9 5.4 24.4 0.0 24.4 12.2 9.1 5.2
Fam-Plan 87.5 0.0 87.5 43.8 18.8 19.1 62.5 0.0 62.5 31.3 5.1 13.7 25.0 0.0 25.0 12.5 13.8 5.4
Hum-Rights 58.0 0.0 58.0 29.0 15.7 11.4 24.0 0.0 24.0 12.0 4.0 5.9 34.0 0.0 34.0 17.0 11.7 5.5
Labor 55.1 0.0 55.1 27.5 17.3 15.1 39.1 0.0 39.1 19.6 7.0 9.0 15.9 0.0 15.9 8.0 10.3 6.1
Justice 69.6 0.0 69.6 34.8 13.8 13.2 22.2 0.0 22.2 11.1 4.1 4.6 47.4 0.0 47.4 23.7 9.7 8.7
Ed-Hum-Art 100.0 0.0 100.0 50.0 11.9 21.2 16.7 0.0 16.7 8.3 2.6 3.8 83.3 0.0 83.3 41.7 9.2 17.4
Housing 100.0 0.0 100.0 50.0 25.8 30.0 33.3 0.0 33.3 16.7 5.1 12.0 66.7 0.0 66.7 33.3 20.8 18.1
* Except for range & standard deviation, which are not inverted.
^ Differences treat inverse of Dem Low as "High," inverse of Dem High as "Low."

McCain In Comparison

We're now ready to compare McCain, first to the Republicans, then to the Democrats. Comparing him to other Republicans, we find that he is generally more moderate--though not on all issues. Because Republicans and Democrats both skew toward the extreme, the averages are more extreme than the midpoints, and McCain tends to fall between the two. Thus, in the columns of differences, most of the midpoints are negative, while most of the averages are positive. Dividing McCain's difference from the GOP average by the standard deviation for any category gives us the difference in standard deviations (the last column), which is a measure of how far McCain diverges from his fellow Republican senators. We can call this his "maverick measure." Most of them are positive, meaning that he is more liberal. We could also compare his rank directly, but those scores are not as useful for making this sort of comparison between categories. We can see that there are a couple of categories in which he is more than two standard deviations higher than the average--corporate subsidies and fair taxation--but these are atypical. He is usually not more than one standard deviation away. Still, there does seem to be a good case here for calling him a "maverick." The general perception that he is not marching in lockstep seems born out:

John McCain In Context
Progressive Punch Scores Compared To
Senate GOP As A Whole
McCain's Difference From
Category McCain Rep High Rep Low Rep Mid Rep Avg Rep SD Rep High Rep Low Rep Mid Rep Avg Rep Avg in SD
Aid 12.50 31.25 1.14 16.20 7.28 6.97 -18.75 11.36 -3.70 5.22 0.75
Corp-Subs 64.29 76.47 0.00 38.24 16.05 21.21 -12.18 64.29 26.05 48.24 2.27
Ed-Hum-Art 5.88 16.67 0.00 8.34 2.64 3.83 -10.79 5.88 -2.46 3.24 0.85
Env 27.69 64.47 0.00 32.24 14.76 15.39 -36.78 27.69 -4.55 12.93 0.84
Fair Tax 17.74 23.77 0.00 11.89 4.24 5.26 -6.03 17.74 5.85 13.50 2.57
Fam-Plan 0.00 62.50 0.00 31.25 5.05 13.72 -62.50 0.00 -31.25 -5.05 -0.37
Gov-v-Corp 20.59 35.45 0.91 18.18 9.74 8.38 -14.86 19.68 2.41 10.85 1.29
Gov't-4-All 11.16 27.27 0.00 13.64 6.82 5.55 -16.11 11.16 -2.48 4.34 0.78
Health 10.00 27.96 0.00 13.98 5.88 6.75 -17.96 10.00 -3.98 4.12 0.61
Housing 0.00 33.33 0.00 16.67 5.07 11.97 -33.33 0.00 -16.67 -5.07 -0.42
Hum-Rights 6.90 24.00 0.00 12.00 4.00 5.87 -17.10 6.90 -5.10 2.90 0.49
Justice 8.11 22.22 0.00 11.11 4.12 4.58 -14.11 8.11 -3.00 3.99 0.87
Labor 9.09 39.13 0.00 19.57 7.02 8.98 -30.04 9.09 -10.48 2.07 0.23
War-Peace 9.30 21.79 0.00 10.90 3.88 5.36 -12.49 9.30 -1.60 5.42 1.01
Overall 13.98 36.82 2.76 19.79 9.90 7.73 -22.84 11.22 -5.81 4.08 0.53
Average: 14.48 36.21 0.32 18.27 7.1 8.77 -21.72 14.16 -3.78 7.39 0.82

The bottom-line measure of a 0.82 average standard deviation is difficult to quantify in the abstract, since the distribution of GOP voting records is not a bell-shaped curve, which would allow an easy translation of standard deviation into how small a percentage of the population would be that far from the average. But it certainly does conform with other measures that show him more toward the center than the middle of the conservative pack.

Here's a chart, generated by Travis Mitchell, and bowderized a bit by me, that visually summarizes where McCain stands on the different issue categories:

But what if Republicans were like Democrats, only in reverse? What if they had the same degree of independence and diversity? Or, put another, would a Democrat like McCain stand out as a "maverick"? The simplest, most straightforward way to answer that is to compare McCain to the inverse of Senate Democrtatic scores that were shown in the second table above. When we do that, McCain's "maverick measure" vanishes to almost nothing. He still has a "maverick measure" of 2.39 on corporate subsidies, but his "maverisk measure" is negative on seven categories, compared to just two when compared to other Republicans. And several of those almost break below -1. Most signicantly, both the overal "maverick measure" and the average "maverick measure" are less than 0.1:

John McCain In Context
Progressive Punch Scores Compared To
Inverse of Senate Democrats
Inverse of McCane's Difference From Inverse of Senate Dems
Category McCain Dem Low Dem High Dem Mid Dem Avg Dem SD Dem Low Dem High Dem Mid Dem Avg Dem Avg in SD
Aid 12.50 40.34 0.00 20.17 7.84 8.45 -27.84 12.50 -7.67 4.66 0.55
Corp-Subs 64.29 64.29 0.00 32.14 19.48 18.77 0.00 64.29 32.15 44.81 2.39
Ed-Hum-Art 5.88 100.00 0.00 50.00 11.87 21.21 -94.12 5.88 -44.12 -5.99 -0.28
Env 27.69 52.63 0.00 26.31 15.10 13.58 -24.94 27.69 1.38 12.59 0.93
Fair Tax 17.74 50.82 0.00 25.41 8.62 9.71 -33.08 17.74 -7.67 9.12 0.94
Fam-Plan 0.00 87.50 0.00 43.75 18.80 19.08 -87.50 0.00 -43.75 -18.80 -0.99
Gov-v-Corp 20.59 64.55 0.00 32.27 15.45 13.51 -43.96 20.59 -11.68 5.14 0.38
Gov't-4-All 11.16 47.19 0.00 23.59 10.88 9.02 -36.03 11.16 -12.43 0.28 0.03
Health 10.00 41.94 0.00 20.97 7.28 9.49 -31.94 10.00 -10.97 2.72 0.29
Housing 0.00 100.00 0.00 50.00 25.83 30.04 -100.00 0.00 -50.00 -25.83 -0.86
Hum-Rights 6.90 58.00 0.00 29.00 15.69 11.36 -51.10 6.90 -22.10 -8.79 -0.77
Justice 8.11 69.62 0.00 34.81 13.77 13.23 -61.51 8.11 -26.70 -5.66 -0.43
Labor 9.09 55.07 0.00 27.53 17.31 15.09 -45.98 9.09 -18.44 -8.22 -0.54
War-Peace 9.30 46.15 0.00 23.07 12.93 10.58 -36.85 9.30 -13.77 -3.63 -0.34
Overall 13.98 49.36 1.78 25.57 13.48 8.39 -35.38 12.20 -11.59 0.50 0.06
Average: 14.48 61.83 0.12 30.97 14.29 14.1 -47.35 14.36 -16.49 0.19 0.09

With this sort of comparison, rather than being seen as a maverick, McCain would be seen as average on average, but fairly erratic--much more centrist on some things, much more conservtive on others. It's only in comparison to other Republicans that this erratic tendency tends to be submerged Of course, the distinction between being a "maverick" and being erratic is not one that is easily made--except in one regard. No one thinks that being erratic is a good thing in a presidential candidate.

Tags: Maverick Myth, Progressive Punch, Senate, John McCain, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

McSame, Myth of A Maverick Deconstructed In Numbers | 17 comments

Pure Speculation (4.00 / 1)

Here's my speculative scenario:
Obama wins the nomination. (Why his followers are so intent on Clinton bashing right now while they simultaneously insist that she has no chance is a puzzle for someone else to unravel.)

For various reasons McCain wins the election. (Any of racism, fear, need to have a strong father figure, or a desire not to give the Dems total control - in other words a split vote.)

We end up with a strongly Dem congress and a GOP executive branch.

How does this then work out in terms of getting progressive (or any other kind) of legislation passed? When the tables were turned under Bill Clinton the net result was more conservative than Dems realized at the time.

Policies not Politics

by: robertdfeinman @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 10:24:57 AM CDT

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

All This Number Crunching And You Want Pure Speculation? (4.00 / 1)

Legislation?

If McCain is elected, expect World War III.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 10:28:58 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

numbers (4.00 / 1)

I'm not trying to minimize all your hard work, but if McCain is sure to lose then his political history is irrelevant.

If there is a strong likelihood that he will win then getting people to focus on what a divided government will look like is not premature.

In other words, you must also have some doubts about a Obama cakewalk.

Policies not Politics

by: robertdfeinman @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 11:25:31 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

I Just Don't See The Point Of Micro-Speculation (4.00 / 1)

"Bomb!-Bomb!-Bomb! Bomb!-Bomb!-Iran!"

What more do you need to know?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 11:32:29 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

agreed (0.00 / 0)

I think your posting had nothing to do with predicting the election or how McCain would govern. Instead, it was a deconstruction of the "maverick" myth, which applies to McCain only because his party is in such lockstep.

I think this election will be won or lost depending on whether we can educate the public about how conservative John McCain is.

"100 years" in Iraq is a good start. But pointing out his far right legislative record, voting to abolish the minimum wage and voting against health insurance for children, will also help paint him as yet another extreme conservative like Bush.

by: existenz @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 12:55:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Clinton bashing (0.00 / 0)

Speaking for myself, I continue to be harshly critical of Clinton on blogs because I think she is seriously damaging Obama's chances by staying in the race. The media still sees fit to cover this like it's actually close, giving her free advertising to keep throwing kitchen sinks, when in reality she has no chance to win. Now, McSame has a 13 point lead on Obama, and a 20 point lead on Clinton, and this is a result of McSame getting a free ride because Hillary refuses to give up her impossible quest.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talk...

I just fear that by the time Obama and the progressive infrastructre can actually get around to defining McSame, it will be too late, and we will have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. The longer this charade goes on, the harder it will be to knock McCain down.

That being said, thank you Paul for this diary. More needs to be done to define McCain and you are leading the charge.

by: BCdem @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 13:46:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

interesting (0.00 / 0)

So your take is that it is Clinton who is turning off potential Obama supporters? Do you have any evidence for this? If it is so, at least it proves some justification for the bashing.

I think the simple facts of prejudice and fear mongering are sufficient to keep McCain in a strong position. If he is leading then all the more reason to focus on him.

It is my impression that some strong Obama supporters would rather support McCain or abstain than vote for Clinton. If that is so, then they really don't understand political realities.

I assume some who make these statements publicly are actually GOP shills, but the rest have given a new meaning to cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Will you really be happy with Bush III?

Policies not Politics

by: robertdfeinman @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 14:20:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

I Think Both Sides Are Guilty Of This (0.00 / 0)

Basically, there's so little substantive difference between Clinton and Obama that it drives their extreme partisans a bit crazy, IMHO.

If there were greater substantive differences, then it would be possible to focus more attention on that. But as it is, there's not much to focus on except the trivial, the ephemeral, the atmospheric, the incidental, accidental, and imaginary.

Think high school popularity contest.

Nothing could be more viscious or deadly.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 14:35:34 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

popularity (0.00 / 0)

Paul:
Perhaps you can find some data which compares fans of American Idol to their political behavior (wink!).

Policies not Politics

by: robertdfeinman @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 15:29:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Hahahaha! (0.00 / 0)

I am Laffin...

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

by: HousesofProgress @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 20:18:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well, At 71, McCain's PERFECT For American Idle (0.00 / 0)

American Idol, tho--not so much.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 20:39:01 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Response (0.00 / 0)

No, I will not be happy with Bush III, and was not advocating voting for him or abstaining. The point I was making is that Obama is now having to confront Clinton and the right wing/McCain at the same time, and getting hit like this, while not being able to focus on McCain is beginning to damage his general election standing. Given that Clinton has no real path to the nomination, I'm just arguing that seeing the writing on the wall and dropping out would allow the Democrats and progressives to focus all their fire on McCain instead of each other.

by: BCdem @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 14:43:44 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Is there a way to usey this data? (4.00 / 1)

Of course, the distinction between being a "maverick" and being erratic is not one that is easily made--except in one regard. No one thinks that being erratic is a good thing in a presidential candidate.

This is good, but the numbers are wholly impenetrable to me. I am sure it is just me, but this provides data I am unable to contextualize.

A couple good examples, a single obvious example, and numbers to supply support. I am sure the date is meaningful, but my woolly untrained eye finds it far too dense to scan.

He knows nothing about economics, but is a republican, and will let the same Bush policies continue to destroy America's economy(ie your income) he says he's the 'defense' candidate but obviously KNOWS NOTHING about the war or the region(!!!) [how is he not destroyed as a candidate already?] He says hes a Maverick, but he's just erratic and confused. He says he's young enough to run, but already seems wooly about his memory. He supports the surge, but can't explain why. He wants to continue the war, "and other wars, Im sorry," he proudly admits.

McBush is toast, but lets apply the heat with the light.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

by: HousesofProgress @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 10:47:39 AM CDT

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

This Is Meant To Be Supplementary (0.00 / 0)

Obviously, the big examples are what we need to focus on, and this analysis is not meant to substitute for that. My purpose here was not to be crafting a master narrative, but simply to provide a solid statistical analysis for showing that McCain's maverick label only makes sense compared to the lockstep nature of the GOP Senate.

I present all the data here for the benefit of those who are number-hungry wonks. But all you really need to know is contained in the last two paragraphs of this diary--and, as supporting data, the last column of the last table, which I talk about in those two paragraphs.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 11:42:53 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Yes of course (0.00 / 0)

I did not mean that this detailed work was intended to replace other work, or that it was unecessary. I, writing badly, meant that you, or others, should use it in such a manner as to make the wonky erratic nature of McCain more clear.

I was hoping that the number-hungry wonk workers, without whom government would be near impossible, would do their willy wonka best on the tables and create something that produces heat as well.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

by: HousesofProgress @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 12:28:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Great diary, Paul. Just one question. (0.00 / 0)

I just have one question. Do you think it's feasible for not just progressives, but the Democratic Party as well, to start defining in the midst of a protracted primary campaign? I fear the McSame's free ride in the press is less a result of sycophantic adulation, and more a result of the Obama-Clinton nonsense hogging all the coverage, and presenting Democrats in a negative light.

Assuming Chris Bowers is right, and we don't have a presumptive nominee until June, or worst-case, July. McCain will have an opportunity to continue to coast, having his gaffes published on page 11 below the fold, while the absurdities of the Democratic contest continue.

How do progressives and the party get McSame defined in this context? This is a fantastic post, but I don't think the MSM frequents Open Left.

by: BCdem @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 13:53:35 PM CDT

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Wouldn't It Be Nice If The House Dems Called Him To Testify (0.00 / 0)

on what the hell kind of info he has about Iran helping al qaeda?

There are all sorts of questions he could be asked that would simply leave him looking like the clueless old coot he actually is.

Beyond that, I have no answers off the top of my head, but I do have a general observation, which is that I think we need to attack the M$M and McCain as a unit, basically arguing that he's being brought to us by the same lazy, lying, kiss-ass press that brought us the last clueless, incompetent GOP president.

Hmmm, maybe something along the lines of "Who would you rather have a glass of warm milk with?"

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Sat Mar 22, 2008 at 14:20:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

McSame, Myth of A Maverick Deconstructed In Numbers | 17 comments

Start a Petition »