Good round-up, but… (0.00 / 0)

…did Matt Yglesias write this post?  Spelling errors galore!

---

by: Haggai @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 11:59:25 AM CDT

 

Oh, and talking about peer review (0.00 / 0)

(which comes up later in this thread), you guys know that you misspelled Heath Shuler’s name (NC-11) in your list of Blue Dogs, right?

---

by: NC 11 CD @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 21:31:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]  

"It Was The Popular Vote Metric, Stupid" (0.00 / 0)

It’s like when to prnounce someone really dead, when there brain is dead, their heart stops beating or both?

The MSM has never fully accepted that a candidate is dead when they don’t have the delegates (brain waves) but they do have the popular vote (their heart is still beating). The public doesn’t either – that’s why they don’t really like our electoral vote system and hate it when there is a discrepancy between the popular vote (their heart count) and the electoral vote (the government’s brain count).

As long as there was a chance at winning the popular vote (her heart was still beating) they would keep Hillary alive on life support. They did not feel it was their responsibility or place to pull the plug.  

But Tuesday was the perfect storm wiping popular vote metric off the table. (The heart stopped beating as well.) She was by all measures of life – dead. So dead she was pronounced.

---

by: C.B. Todd @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:25:45 PM CDT

 

Disagree on last point (4.00 / 1)

First, as Digby has pointed out, it isn’t really the pundits’ place to declare the race over, particularly when there are many votes yet to be cast.

However, once the results were in from NC (landslide) and IN (squeaker) it was clear that Obama wasn’t bleeding support and that Hillary was hanging on by her fingernails.  And with only 7 contests in small states left, it bacame hard NOT to call the race.

All of the criticism that Digby and Meteor Blades rightly heap on Russert and his ilk would have been multiplied manifold if they had made the call before then.

Many of us said to you after TX and OH not to worry so, it was going to be over May 7 at the latest, and that seems now to have been correct.  

John McCain–He’s not who you think he is.

---

by: Mimikatz @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:32:17 PM CDT

 

EDWARDS DID NOT DISCLOSE WHO HE VOTED FOR (4.00 / 2)

Jesus H Christ – people you have got to go and read or watch the source material.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21…

They are discussing who Edwards will endorse and if he will endorse who he just voted for, and he says yes its very likely, and to emphasize it he says “I just voted for ’em on Tuesday”, one of the interviewers then follows up, “was it Him or Her?” and John laughs.

At about 10:00 min in.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

---

by: Will @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:35:53 PM CDT

 

Mind the diaries at DailyKos (4.00 / 1)

I’ll add that I find this typical of hysteria at DailyKos. They are much too lose with facts and characterizations. Matt was bemoaning mod mentalities, that site has it.

And if we want to talk about increasing progressive leverage, I would put peer reviewing blogger journalism at the big sites would be a top one. We owe it to ourselves not to let these sites be discredited through sloppy work.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

---

by: Will @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:39:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]  

Ok, its not that big a deal (4.00 / 2)

but i find the hysteria at Kos annoying, and the sounds bit is not anywhere near as cut and dry as the diarist makes it out to be.

sorry if I over reacted.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare

---

by: Will @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:50:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]  

Really and truly agree (0.00 / 0)

Jeff Howe from Wired Magazine talked about the quality review process of approving messages through digg and the like.  However, peer review status – a few good looks before it makes front page status would be good.

Agreeing too that Edwards didn’t admit anything.  I watched the video, and the phrase was “I voted for ’em already.”  And – there was specific dialogue about the fact that he didn’t gender-specify.

QT

Visit the Obama Project

Searching for John McCain?

---

by: QueenTiye @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 14:33:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]  

I swear he said "I just voted for her" (0.00 / 0)

 I listened to that section 5 times
Which makes sense in how effusively he spoke of her and how little he said that admiring of Obama

However it also makes no sense because he kept saying “It looked like Obama was going to be the nominee”  so indeed why endorse someonw who is going to lose….not in his political interest…unless he’s being very Machiavellian and well that’s not him.

And it is well known for some time that Elizabeth has not liked Hillary Clinton though she is very admiring of her healthcare plan.

Therefore nothing can be divined from this.

---

by: debcoop @ Sat May 10, 2008 at 00:22:05 AM CDT

[ Parent ]  

The impossible.. (4.00 / 1)

I think a huge candidacy-ending gaffe could still come from Clinton.  

Free the iPhone

---

by: audi100quattro @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 13:35:38 PM CDT

 

Hmm (0.00 / 0)

I see little evidence that a huge candidacy-ending gaffe would in fact end the Clinton candidacy.

---

by: mcc @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 13:42:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]  

Exactomento! (0.00 / 0)

Chris states:

“Given how fast this is taking place since pundits declared the race over, it appears that the national media could have done this anytime since Wisconsin if they so desired.”

From the instant I turned on the tube Tuesday night for the NC and IN primaries I was amazed that a pro-Obama script had been written for the evening, at least by NBC-MSNBC and CNN. It was a major sea change from the weeks of Rev.Wright bashing.

All I could think of is how do they coordinate all this stuff? Was there a pre-game show that I missed? Do they decide en mass that they need a new script to engage viewers and just email it to all the traditional media to launch at once?

As Meteor Blades warns though, “the traditional media’s interests are not our interests” and only occasionally will they coincide.

---

by: Ed in Montana @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 14:50:26 PM CDT

 

My theory (4.00 / 2)

is that they do it with pheromones  

---

by: mcc @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 15:46:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]  

They can only push it so far (0.00 / 0)

  If they’d stuck to the pro-Hillary script after Obama’s narrative-defying big night, they would have lost a lot of their remaining credibility with their audience. Proclaiming a Hillary win in the face of Tuesday’s hard realities would have been an Iraqi-Information-Minister moment for the media, so it was time to cut bait.

 Facts are stubborn things.

 That said, I hope Obama’s less naive about the media than he’s been up to this point. That’s been his Achilles heel all along. He’s gotten a few days of positive coverage — but he’d be foolish to think this is going to be the norm.  

“We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience.” — Howard Zinn

---

by: Master Jack @ Fri May 09, 2008 at 16:39:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]