"This hardening (political) polarization (in the Democratic Party) is very concerning...."

[Radio_Lady]

Talk show host Thom Hartmann said it on his national program on Friday, April 25. I said it a couple of days ago.

What do you think? Can we keep on with the munching and crunching of one candidate or the other that keeps on coming?

It's a dead-heat in Indiana according to polls on CNN this afternoon. I hope we are not just going into the Democratic dumpster with these candidates.

While I have your attention, read this Paul Krugman Op-Ed in today's (4/25/08).

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/25/opinion/25krugman.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

Self-Inflicted Confusion
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: April 25, 2008

After Barack Obama’s defeat in Pennsylvania, David Axelrod, his campaign manager, brushed it off: “Nothing has changed tonight in the basic physics of this race.”

He may well be right — but what a comedown. A few months ago the Obama campaign was talking about transcendence. Now it’s talking about math. “Yes we can” has become “No she can’t.”

This wasn’t the way things were supposed to play out.

Mr. Obama was supposed to be a transformational figure, with an almost magical ability to transcend partisan differences and unify the nation. Once voters got to know him — and once he had eliminated Hillary Clinton’s initial financial and organizational advantage — he was supposed to sweep easily to the nomination, then march on to a huge victory in November.

Well, now he has an overwhelming money advantage and the support of much of the Democratic establishment — yet he still can’t seem to win over large blocs of Democratic voters, especially among the white working class.

As a result, he keeps losing big states. And general election polls suggest that he might well lose to John McCain.

What’s gone wrong?

MORE AT LINK ABOVE --------------------------------------------->>>

Cordially,

Radio Lady in Oregon

[dcindian]

1. It is the definition of Rovian politcs.

Thank you Clinton for sending us there.

[Radio_Lady]

6. Is Ms Clinton REALLY to blame for this? How so?

Thanks for your comments.

[redqueen]

12. You really don't know?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5685078


Oh, and Krugman is just spewing her campaign's talking points there...

[Radio_Lady]

17. The mudslinging in this primary season is enough to give me great pause...

and I am standing in the same place. All I can see is nitpicking and spinning on the part of BOTH camps.

"I am a Democrat and I will fully support the Democratic nominee -- whoever he or she may be."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5645362

[redqueen]

22. That sounds like the people that say Dems are as bad as Repubs.

[Radio_Lady]

25. Red Queen, that comment does not apply to this broadcaster or her husband.

Thank you.

[redqueen]

26. It does if you're pretending these campaigns are equally smeartastic.

[Radio_Lady]

27. I am all for unifying dialogue from this point on, and not unaware that either

candidate could sponsor smears.

So far, I've seen just a couple of ads for Barack Obama in Oregon, and none that I recall for Hillary Clinton.

I won't decide the vote on SMEAR CAMPAIGNS, whoever sponsors or receives them.

Thank you.

Radio Lady Ellen

[redqueen]

28. Did you read the piece from the Telegraph?

[Stuart G]

18. I agree completely..If Rove were in a room,,

a year ago, and could plan the demise of the Democrats, that is exactly how he would do it. Get them to pick a fight among themselves, divide them, and allow a seemingly centrist (seemingly, not really,) gain the moderate ground. After the Dems beat themselves to a pulp, then whoever the Thugs put up would seem calm in comparison. And guess what ...it is happening.....

and ............that was how the assholes gained power, divide and conquer..name calling, so and so is a "terrorist"..fear.
hatred, division..not exactly a new idea...

[Radio_Lady]

21. Could this have been avoided? Or was it happenstance? Why would a party choose this position?

[democracy1st]

59. Hillary Clinton did not have to go along with Operation Chaos

nor did she have to team up with Richard Mellon Scaife

[Egnever]

2. Thom's right! Krugman on the other hand has lost all objectivity

all we need is for hillary and apparently people like you to accept the reality that she has been beaten and we can end this farce.

[Radio_Lady]

5. There are almost as many Democrats who feel the exact opposite, Egnever.

Some feel that Barack is unelectable in the General Election.

Some feel he is too young and inexperienced. A great orator, to be sure, but untested in many respects.

Some even believe he is an "empty suit."

What kind of a road are we on anyway? It's certainly not what I envisioned months ago.

We haven't even voiced our opinion in Oregon yet.

I could say it isn't over until the Fat Lady Sings, but that might me quite misconstrued in this context...

Cordially,

Radio Lady in Oregon

[Egnever]

9. doesn't matter what the almost as many think

he has won the majority and she will not regain it. It is over no matter how much the lesser half wishes it weren't so.

Its time for her to drop out and stop tearing down our nominee, or if she cant bring herself to give up despite overwhelming evidence she is done then she needs to shut her mouth and run on her own merits instead of running on trying to bring Obama down.

I have absolutely no problem with her staying in the race if she stops the kitchen sink strategy but as long as she continues with her current theme she needs to be gone. She is making Hukabee look like a class act by comparison.

[anigbrowl]

52. Krugman is bankrupt

Like her dreadfully badly-run campaign? Or more seriously (since he's an economist) her proposed interest rate freeze, which The Economist called 'deeply unsound' and which completely undermines the point of having an independent central bank?

How can Krugman write columns comparing the subprime crisis to 1929 without mentioning the Glass- Steagall act (because Bill Clinton repealed it), which removed the regulatory barriers between investment and commercial banking and is directly responsible for the securitization of mortgages and the consequent over-leveraging of those securities? Krugman, as an economist, cannot be unaware of the significance of Glass-Steagall - it was the longest lived regulatory framework put in place after the Great Depression and defined the boundaries of American banking for three generations. Without its repeal, banks could never have played the game of 'pass the parcel' that has gone on for the last 10 years with mortgage equity being traded, rated, and hedged against in schemes resembling the junk bond euphoria of the 1980s. We've wound up with this huge mess because commercial banks started acting like investment banks when they didn't have the knowledge, and investment banks taking commercial banks assurances on the securities they issued because they assumed (wrongly) that commercial banks were performing the same sort of due diligence on their asset classes as an investment bank would, marking their value to market regularly and so on. This was simply not possible until Glass-Steagall was repealed by Bill Clinton: it was to prevent abuses of exactly this type that it was instituted in the first place.

Here's one of his columns on the subject - http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/21/opinion/21krugman.html?_r=1&oref=slogin After reading this you would be less well-informed on the subject than you were to begin with. Unfortunately, I get this a lot with him - he constantly talks down to his readers and constructs arguments that only make sense to the uninformed. Even when I agree with him on some topic I sometimes get annoyed with his column because he's constructed such a shoddy argument I know that people on the right will be able to rip it apart easily.

He has sold his credibility and I consider his analysis these days to be of little more significance than posts on a forum like DU. When someone who knows a particular field (economics) deliberately omits fundamental but slightly embarrassing facts from their analysis of a situation, then you can't trust them any more. I'm reminded of a doctor on retainer from a tobacco company insisting that there's no scientific proof that smoking cigarettes directly causes cancer.

[BzaDem]

15. All we need is for you to accept (before Nov 5th) the reality that Obama cannot win the GE

and then we can actually proceed to winning this election with Hillary.

[Radio_Lady]

23. Of course, it's one of the main tenets, but I think that it may apply to either

candidate at this point.

People are getting fed up and when one or the other is chosen, there may be mass defections -- including the people who will stay at home.

How in friggin' hell did we get so polarized?

How do we get out of it?

Cordially,

Radio Lady in Oregon

[BzaDem]

29. I agree that Hillary has her problems too, and she may lose. But her electability problems pale in

comparison with Obama's.

[Radio_Lady]

31. Regrettably, I think each of them has problems at this point. Worst of all,

as soon as the eventual nominee is decided -- WHOMEVER IT IS -- I think that there will be such general upset with EITHER PERSON that our party will face unprecedented losses during the General Election. I certainly hope I am DEAD WRONG.

I'm about as disgusted as I can get today, Friday, April 25th.

[democracy1st]

60. It's one thing for a Repub to attack a Dem

but when a Dem uses rightwing tactics it's splits the party wide open

[Egnever]

38. Unfortunately you are projecting. Clinton cant seem to win a contest...

with anything other than a closed primary. She is a disaster waiting to happen and your crew are buying her bullshit hook line and sinker.

Hillary has a problem with open primaries. Her argument at the moment seems to hinge on the idea that she is the better GE candidate but when the contests were open to all as they will be in the GE she doesn't fair so well at all. How she gets away with the I am more electable argument at all is beyond me.

I got these numbers from CNN

*Arkansas open O 26% C 70%
*California semi open O 43% C 52%
*Mass semi open O 41% C 56%
*New Jersey semi open O 44% C 54%
*Ohio open O 44% C 54%
*Rhode Island semi open O 40% C 58%
*Tennessee open O 41% C 54%
*Texas semi open O 47% C 51%


Alabama open O 56% C 42%
Georgia open O 67% C 31%
Hawaii open O 76% C 24%
Idaho open O 79% C 17%
Illinois open O 65% C 33%
Minnesota open O 66% C 32%
Mississippi open O 61% C 37%
Missouri open O 49% C 48%
New Hampshire semi open O 37% C 39%
North Dakota open O 61% C 37%
South Carolina open O 55% C 27%
Utah semi open O 57% C 39%
Vermont open O 59% C 39%
Virginia open O 64% C 35%
Wisconsin open O 58% C 41%
Wyoming open O 61% C 38%

Total Clinton 8 Obama 16
total with only open primaries or caucuses so far Clinton 4 Obama 14

Her whining about cacusses is also a complete falacy.

most of the open elections Obama won were primaries.

Alabama
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY February 05, 2008
Open primary: 60 total delegates*

Georgia
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY February 05, 2008
Open primary: 102 total delegates*

Illinois
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY February 05, 2008
Open primary: 184 total delegates*
153 tied to February 5 primary, 31 superdelegates

Mississippi
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY March 11, 2008
Open primary: 40 total delegates*
33 tied to March 11 primary, 7 superdelegates

Missouri
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY February 05, 2008
Open primary: 88 total delegates*
72 tied to February 5 primary, 16 superdelegates


South Carolina
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY January 26, 2008
Open primary: 54 total delegates*
45 tied to January 26 primary; 9 superdelegates

Utah
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY February 05, 2008
Semi-open primary: 29 total delegates*
23 tied to February 5 primary, 6 superdelegates

Vermont
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY March 04, 2008
Open primary: 23 total delegates*
15 tied to March 4 primary, 8 superdelegates

Virginia
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY February 12, 2008
Open primary: 101 total delegates*
83 tied to February 12 primary, 18 superdelegates

Wisconsin
DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY February 19, 2008
Open primary: 92 total delegates*
74 tied to February 19 primary, 18 superdelegates


They have each won 15 primaries at this point 10 of his wins were open primaries while only 8 of hers were. So your story is completely full of holes except for the idea that clinton cant win a caucus in the whole contest she has won one, Nevada and even in that one she walked away with less delegates.

So in conclusion he has won just as many primaries as she has and he has won more of the ones that were open as the GE will be. The only time she can win is when it is limited to just Dem's or she lived in the state. Her chances in the GE are pathetic.

[Radio_Lady]

39. As far as I know, even if your figures are correct, we have a damaged system with two states

where people voted and it did not count, and superdelegates who are doing whatever they want.

(See Oklahoma superdelegate who voted today for Obama despite the results in his state -- Clinton won.)

Cordially,

Radio Lady Ellen in Oregon

[Egnever]

40. She still loses

and in a couple more primaries she will be losing even if you give her fl and MI as they stand which ain't going to happen but even if it did he is close to surpassing her even with those fake totals added in.

she lost its over no matter how much you or any of her supporters don't like it.

[Radio_Lady]

42. Ok. You win. I'm going on to other pursuits. See ya after the flyover...

I'm convinced this site will not unite behind EITHER candidate after the primaries -- and Skinner will have to decide what to do about it.

That should be interesting. I've gone back to my movie reviewing and other personl interests.

Hey, even if the Democrats win in November 2008 with O or C or someone else, there will be more carping and haggling.

There will be bumper stickers that say, "Don't blame me, I voted for ___________." You fill in the blanks.

This political year will go down in history.

Remember our goal?

Replacing Bush with a DEMOCRAT? Now it's not just a DEMOCRAT, it's YOUR Democrat, and damn the others. Sorry, it's just too ugly for words.

Good night and good luck,


Radio Lady

[JoFerret]

54. Thanks Radio

.

[ginchinchili]

56. I'm afraid it's objectivity that Krugman is demonstrating.

Obama is no magic man. Like many others, I'm not impressed with his vague rhetoric about change. He's not ready for prime time. He's edited the Harvard school paper, been a community organizer, and talked people into electing him to office. To an objectively thinking person, this does not impress.

[azmouse]

3. Hillary was supposed to sweep easily to the nomination

at least she was til the primaries actually started.

Interesting that she hasn't been able to put this away if she is so right for this country, huh?

[Radio_Lady]

8. But there is no gulf separating them. There are two lost states and other ways to

count her support.

And the primaries are still waiting for millions of people who have not voted before.

We still have not received our ballots in Oregon?

Can you see why this is so disheartening?

Cordially,

Radio Lady in Oregon

[azmouse]

10. If all the states did not vote in the primaries

how would that be any different than in almost all election years?

Blame your state for the late primary. Don't blame a candidate.

Hillary should respectfully bow out of the race and let Obama and Dem party move on to fight McBush.
We need a win in Nov and Obama is our best chance.

[crankychatter]

4. The solution is for the presumptive loser to step aside and stop the smears

but of course, you don't get that

repeating clinton camp spin and lies; about the importance of large state Dem on Dem contests, and exaggerated demographic divides, doesn't make them true, usable or lend credibility to your argument

you have weak links in your logic

own your bias

You just want us to be afraid of "white backlash" in the GE.

Why not say "Obama can't win because he's Black" if that's what you mean?

All the soft angled, nuanced and polite language, doesn't conceal the truth.

[Radio_Lady]

11. Do you realize that I have not expressed any views in this election?

I contributed to BOTH candidates the night of the Pennsylvania election.

Do not twist my words, Crankychatter. I feel they could put this ticket together and make it work, but I'm hard pressed to see how that will happen.

Don't call me biased.

Don't call me illogical.

Don't call my statements spin. I could honestly see benefits from EITHER of these politicians at the top of the ticket. This is a King Solomon choice in my mind.

I do not appreciate your stuffing your words into my mouth. It is reprehensible.

Thank you.

Radio Lady in Oregon

[BzaDem]

19. Don't worry, that poster goes off on anyone who disagrees in the slightest way

The tirade against you is nothing unusual.

[crankychatter]

20. pretenses of objectivity while presenting unexamined PR as fact, belies your argument

faux rage notwithstanding

People that want everyone to look up to them as being SO much smarter than the rest of us...

self-promoting "experts"

ALWAYS assert impartiality

truth is, your conclusions precede your argument

you can't own your own to save your life... image, superceding substance.

[Radio_Lady]

30. Well, thank you, crankychatter, you've earned your name quite well!

Is my rage false? I've had a bunch of sleepless nights over this campaign season. What about you?

"Unexamined PR?" Where did you get that?

"Pretenses of objectivity?" I want a Democrat in the best way at the top of the ticket. I didn't say I was objective about that. You don't have to accept it, but making this difficult choice is just what I am about this time. You don't have to believe it at all, but I decry your fingerpointing.

As for the rest of your comments, they're yours and you're welcome to them.

Cordially,

Radio Lady Ellen Kimball

(Picture from my first job -- co-host of the first integrated children's program in the South (Miami, Florida - 1957)

[crankychatter]

32. I could help you

but I won't

Dem on Dem contests in larger states with narrow margins do not put those states at risk, necessarily in the general election

THAT is Clinton PR and simply absurd... it was an essential link in your chain of logic and it should be EXAMINED

there were a couple of others...

The demographic split is greatly exaggerated, as is the Red State/Blue State mythology

We live in an urban archipelago

Blue States are Blue because of Blue Cities... and Blue Cities are blue because of African American people.

You'd better quit focussing on lost causes (gun toting xenophobes) and focus on the TRUE Party Base if you're sincere about wanting a Democrat in the White House.

This is the future... the cities.

Why do you use MSM spin so foundationally in your thinking? Don't you know that War Profiteers, Energy Transnationals, Big Insurance, Megapharms and other corporations, dominate the editorial content of these outlets?

I invite you to look at yourself

You're welcome

[Radio_Lady]

36. Here's YOUR personal comment directed right back at you, cranky...

"what are you poking around for?

wash your windows and go mow your lawn." :sarcasm:

That's pretty funny. FYI, the guys mowed the lawn yesterday and it looks great. The windows weren't washed recently, but we'll get to them soon!

Have a great day wherever and whoever you are.

Cordially,

Radio Lady in Oregon

[nomorewhopper]

7. Hillary is to blame

she has zero, nil, no, nada, absolutely zilch shot at becoming our nominee. rather than let the party coalesce around obama, she destroys him.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

13. Hillary and Obama are both very flawed candidates - I don't know what people were thinking...

when voting for those two....

Hillary - majorly polarizing and voted on the wrong side of the war.

Obama - total newbie who has no experience. No-one knew much about him. Turns out he has tons of baggage and both he and his wife are making a bunch of "rookie" mistakes/gaffes.

[Radio_Lady]

14. Well, who would you rather have seen? Kerry? Gore? Any of the others who actually

ran?

I guess those days are over.

We have what we have.

Cordially,

Radio Lady Ellen in Oregon

[kerry-is-my-prez]

24. hell yes - Gore. I know of tons of people who would vote for him over those two.

n/t

[Radio_Lady]

33. We took that as far as it would go, but no dice! (PHOTO)

[Straight Shooter]

16. As an Oregonian, I would like my opinion by ballot to count, as well.

I switched from being a lifelong Independent to Democrat for the sole purpose of voting in this primary. I talked a lifelong Republican into switching to Democrat; he will also vote for Hillary. He really wanted Gore to run, he has a "Re-Elect Gore 2008" bumper sticker on his car.

If my vote doesn't matter now, why should it matter in the GE? :shrug:

edit to change "Gore to win" to "Gore to run." Wishful thinking, I guess.

[Radio_Lady]

37. I'm right near you in suburban Portland... feeling the same way.

Just give me a chance to vote by May 20th. I'll probably write in JOHN ADAMS because that HBO program was fantastic. :sarcasm:

Why would anyone want to cut off someone's voice? I've been waiting almost EIGHT YEARS for this moment. All the people who are calling for one or another candidate to quit -- how would you like it if I suggested that to you and you didn't have a voice? Same thing goes for the DEVASTATED STATES of OHIO and MICHIGAN. Whoever was involved in THAT clusterf***???

Al Gore probably doesn't need the big headache of being President. He'll live longer and do better things. For God's sake, can you imagine how the Republicans would have beat HIM up in the primaries?

Cordially,

Radio Lady in Oregon

[Straight Shooter]

41. We Oregonians do like to have our voices heard, don't we?

:D

John Adams was something else indeed. (Now some people are comparing Obama to Adams, hehe, like comparing bush to Lincoln). As for Florida and Michigan, that isn't democracy, that's the destruction of democracy by people with power agendas who don't care about their citizens. This country has been holding elections for, what, over 200 years? We still haven't got it right. Such a mess. I'm more disgusted than I've ever been, and I never thought anything would disgust me more than Reagan getting elected.

As for the iconic Al Gore, a man whom Joseph Campbell could have written a book about, I don't think the Repubs would have stood a chance against Al if they dared attack him. The anger of the Democrats and Independents would have come at them like a roaring tidal wave.

On a more positive note, my fellow Oregonian, I love your sig pic. Don't let the "cranky" DU'ers get ya down. :hi:

[Radio_Lady]

43. Thanks, Straight Shooter. We're leaving on our vacation just a few days after the Oregon primary.

I'll celebrate my 69th birthday (May 31, 2008) in the "Cradle of Liberty" -- Boston, Massachusetts -- catching up with old friends and some family members plus a couple of new-found DU friends, I hope.

Thanks for the wave.

See you on the flyover... and catch you later.

Peace, love and happiness,

Radio Lady Ellen in Oregon

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&7

What's Ellen talking about NOW? Check out her web journal at this link:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Radio_Lady

[Shoelace]

45. another Oregonian who wants to vote

just like we have every little or big election in Oregon. Nice to see you two here! Keep the good thoughts, we will need them in coming months.

:hi:

[Radio_Lady]

46. Hi Shoelace -- Nice to CU@theDU!

:hi:

:hug:

[Shoelace]

53. you too Radio Lady!

I love your posts. :loveya:

[Radio_Lady]

57. Why, thank you, m'dear. You make me blush...

:hi:

:hug:

RL in OR

[madfloridian]

34. Krugman has sold his soul for Hillary.

It is hard to take his work seriously right now.

I have kept all his columns faithfully, trusted him.

Now I don't.

[newmajority]

35. Thom is doing his best to maintain his neutrality, but at times he goes too far

Like when he says "Hillary could be another FDR". When she reprsents the very organization (DLC) that celebrated the Repuke takeover of congress in 1994 as an excuse to "liberate" the Democratic Party from FDR's legacy.

Hillary is FDR like I'm Sean Hannity.

As for Krugman.... like the rest of the NY Times, he needs to pull his head out of the Clintons' collective ass.

[juajen]

44. You're amusing!

NT

[Political Heretic]

48. You are often amused by facts, I've noticed.

[Political Heretic]

47. I think Obama has done amazing at demonstrating a different kind of politics in the face of extreme

opposition. He has gone out of his way to practice what he preaches, showing at times I would argue too much restraint in his counter-attacks to Clinton's ghetto-style kitchen sink politics.

Unfortunately for Obama, he is learning that ones ability to play politics by a different set of rules is slightly determined by the willingness of your opponent to do the same.

[ruby slippers]

49. and unfortunately the old maxim that nice guys finish last.....

Don't troll on me....I support Obama fully, but I do believe that as much as we as a country say that we want a new kind of politics, the old politicians and media conglomerates are thinking otherwise and they have more power than the poor peasant commoners.......

I am beginning to think it will really take a revolution.

[Political Heretic]

50. We'll see. I mean, he's basically all but locked up the nomination running a different kind

of campaign. Just because he's been pulled down from the stratosphere a little bit by a media and opponent that delights in old gutter politics doesn't mean he's been completely pulled to earth. He's winning this thing by remaining No-Shock Barack, No-Drama Obama - cool and collected, focusing on substance, even in critical counter-attacks.

I'm more worried about the general. THATS where he may have to fight fire with pure fire... I dunno. But I read some interviews with him and his staff and its sounds like they are very prepared to punch back to attacks rapidly and forcefully.

[ruby slippers]

51. yes, and I think another perception is that....

as a man he has to be careful when running against a woman. (No sexism intended here) If he fights back too much to her, he could be seen as a "womanizer". It takes a real gentleman to stand there in the kitchen and take it when the wife (in this case Hillary) is slapping you around. Barack is a gentleman in the truest sense of the word and the media has not picked up on that.

I hope it will be easier for him to counterpunch McCain. But, then again, it will be the youthful Senator disrespecting the old combat Veteran.....I can hear it now....

[ginchinchili]

55. Excellent article. Thank you.

Krugman shines a little reality on this unfortunate race.

[Radio_Lady]

58. I had no idea so many people had turned against him.

Thank you for the thanks, Ginchinchili.

See you on the flip side.

RL

[Maddy McCall]

61. K/R

Thanks ellen for this thread.

On edit: can't rec it, been over 24 hours...but a kick anyway.

[McCamy Taylor]

62. The last time it was this bad was 1972 when Rove was working with CREEP

Guys, see the writing on the wall before you run into it and break your glasses. The Democratic Primary is being punked by the RNC. The internet is crawling with pranksters doing nothing but setting Democrats against Democrats.