... who claimed in the site's comments to be a liberal and who was critical of Texas Democrats and their candidates ...

To be fair, I don't think Buck Smith ever claimed to be a liberal, and it was pretty obvious to me at least he was working for John Cornyn. I even said so in this swing state comment.

Posted at July 1, 2008 5:09 PM in response to GOP Senator's Top Staffer Busted Posting Comments Under Fake Name On Liberal Blog

Eric sounds so disappointed. No worries, it's Zogby seeing Obama ahead, it's bound to be wrong.

I must not have my oh-God-Obama-is-being-attacked-dar. (Either that, or I have lost by snark-dar). I don't see anything in Eric's post that makes me think he is disappointed.

In any case though, you're right about Zogby. It's about as worthless me polling my neighbors.

Posted at May 4, 2008 11:48 AM in response to Zogby: Obama Ahead In North Carolina, Edging Hillary In Indiana

Yeah, I caught it right after I hit send. My mea culpa is about 6 comments below.

Posted at March 6, 2008 2:29 PM in response to SurveyUSA: Hillary And Obama Win Electoral College In Distinct Ways

Oppps! I misread the map. Ignore my comment about VA. However, NH does seem to have flipped.

Posted at March 6, 2008 2:04 PM in response to SurveyUSA: Hillary And Obama Win Electoral College In Distinct Ways

Well, it's interesting that Clinton would win in VA, while Obama would not, even though Obama soundly won that primary. Similarly, NH seems to have flipped for Obama.

The moral of this is that it's too early for these maps to be meaningful.

Posted at March 6, 2008 2:02 PM in response to SurveyUSA: Hillary And Obama Win Electoral College In Distinct Ways

I couldn't agree more with you on sentences 1 and 3. I think the tax records are too tough of a needle to thread, so I'd let them go. I hope you're right about sentence 4, but I'm getting nervous.

Posted at March 5, 2008 12:01 PM in response to What Experience? Obama To Aggressively Engage Hillary's Claim To Foreign Policy Readiness

Here's the DKos diary on it. One of the commenters has the video. I now feel ill having watched it.

Posted at March 3, 2008 7:01 PM in response to Poll: Hillary Up By Five In Texas

She can't do that, can she?

I think she can, though it will be tough needle to for her to thread. I don't have excess cash. But, if someone forced me to tell them to buy or sell short Obama shares on intrade, I'd tell them to sell.

Posted at March 3, 2008 4:49 PM in response to Poll: Hillary Takes Lead In Texas

Those who insist that Hillary deserves fair treatment from the media have been subjected to a tremendous amount of abuse by a tiny and unrepresentative minority of Obama supporters who see such a demand as nothing but Hillary shilling, or "Shillary," as they like to put it.

Greg--I am glad that you specified that it is "an unrepresentative minority" of Obama supporters, unlike Paul Krugman who used no such adjectives. However, to be fair, these people aren't really Obama supporters in origin. For the most part, their hatred for Senator Clinton existed well before Senator Obama was ever on the national scene. This group would have no doubt become Edwards supporters or Richardson supporters had these candidates been the only remaining opposition to Senator Clinton. So instead of using the term "a tiny and unrepresentative minority of Obama supporters", I would use the term "Democratic Clinton haters."

Posted at March 3, 2008 4:44 PM in response to Is Press Harder On Hillary? More Writers Weigh In

Oh no! My dainty thin skin has been so tarnished.

If you want to say that there are some debatable points about Obama's record, then we can all this game with both candidates. Looking closer at Clinton's "35 years" and we find that very few of them are any better than Obama's record for "city commissioner". We could note that, of the three bills she refers to by name on her senate record web page, all three are stuck in committee, two of them have her only as co-sponsor, and two them are also co-sponsored by Obama. According to thomas, she has zero federal laws with her as the lead sponsor. Before the senate, there was her failure to pass healthcare legistlation in 1993-1994.

But, this game is really silly. The only way this makes sense is if you were to (1) define the bar very clearly (bills sponsored and their status, crises handled, major projects and their time, effort, and success, etc.), and (2) objectively compare each candidate to the bar. I have only seen serious partisans take a whack at this, and the outcome ends up being, like this thread bash fest of the other candidate. Anything less than a genuine analysis lacks real substance. Otherwise, we're left with people claiming major accomplishments that consist of non-profit job that they held for less than a year. That's fine for a two minute commercial, but you let's not hold one candidate to a different standard than the other.

Posted at March 3, 2008 3:07 PM in response to Obama's Closing Ad: I Will Take Country In Fundamentally New Direction