Karl Rove, architect of George Bush's 2000 and 2004 election victories, spoke in a messianic manner about a permanent Republican majority, built up a Republican base of economic conservatives, Iraq hawks, gun-loving libertarians, and evangelical Christians, augmented by peeling off from the Democrats a percentage of Hispanic voters and working-class women.

In a Rovian view, this process began with the 1994 seizure of Congress under the leadership of Newt Gingrich and was crowned by the election of Bush in 2000, the post-9/11 takeover of the Senate in 2002, and Bush's reelection accompanied by further gains in the Senate in 2004.

cross-posted at http://outsidetheechosphere.wordpress.co m/

More after the fold.

McCain Campaign: Sitzkrieg?

An underlying assumption about tempered expectations is that the Republican campaign will, at some point, launch into high gear in a nasty but effective manner we've come to expect.   Certainly, Obama's current bump in the poll numbers and all the dizzy expectations within the echosphere are partly an artifact of McCain's campaign not making any significant demonstration of force.   It can certainly be argued that McCain has squandered-in terms of time, money, and message-the advantage he's had since clinching the Republican nomination.

So outside the echosphere we're waiting for reality to hit and expectations to become a bit more sober but it's a fair question to ask:  when and how will McCain and the various 527 allies start hitting back effectively?   So far, they aren't.   The shots at Obama have been almost desultory, ill-coordinated, and with little effect.  McCain also hasn't set a grueling pace as a campaigner.

Cross-posted from http://outsidetheechosphere.wordpress.co m/

There's little doubt that this is looking like a Democratic year. Obama has a number of impressive things going for him:

1) Advantage in Democratic registration. Rasmussen currently has it at 41.4 D, 31.7 R, 26.9 I...the largest gap since they began tracking party I.D. six years ago. [Nov. 04: 38.8D, 37.1 R, 24.1 I; Nov. 06 37.5 D, 31.4 R, 31.2 D. ]

2) The right track/wrong track number is 17/79. [Rasmussen]

3) Bush's approval rating is at a new low, 31 percent. [Rasmussen]

More beneath the fold.  Cross-posted from:  http://outsidetheechosphere.wordpress.co m/

I looked at the polls, took measure of my historical experiences, and checked my gut.   Looking at the Electoral College, right now my guess is another 2000:   265 Obama, 273 McCain.

I have the following switches from 2004:

Bush to Obama:

Colorado (9)
Virginia (13)
Iowa (7)
New Mexico (5)

Kerry to McCain:

Michigan (17)
New Hampshire (4)

Okay, I'm angry.  I'm also disappointed.  In terms of political outcomes, this is the worst I've felt about a Democratic nomination in 40 years and in level of pain it's just a couple of notches below Gore/Bush 2000 and about on the level Kerry/Bush 2004.

I started out ambivalent about Hillary Clinton and came to admire her deeply.  I sent her campaign several hundred dollars that I really couldn't afford because I believed in her (also sent money to Tom Allen and Tom Udall...didn't but all my eggs in one basket).  I think she would make a very good president on her own merits and it wouldn't matter to me whether her last name were Clinton or Chryztowski.

I'm writing this to persuade Hillary supporters who might be dubious about Obama or outright hostile to go ahead and suck it up and vote for him.

There's a lot of hoo-hah being written about Obama's momentum and the state of the race for the nomination between Hillary and Obama.  

I think it's really closer than most people realize and that Texas and Ohio might really tell the tale for Obama.

Analysis below the fold.

Don't know another way to get this where someone will be sure to see it.  I think the delegate trackers on the right-hand side have their numbers reversed between the one that counts MI and FL and the one that doesn't.

That is all.

I really don't get why some people get their knickers in a twist about "mandatory" insurance.   At least here in California, we have mandatory auto insurance.   You want to register your car, you have to show proof of insurance.  No big deal and by doing so, it lowers the costs for everyone.

By making the insurance pool as large as possible, costs should be reduced.

And that brings up my other gripe about attacks on "Hillarycare":   that's it's "government" insurance.   Actually, all the insurance is still through private carriers.  For me, a selling point is that the plan currently available to Members of Congress would become available to everyone...boy, would I want to look at the cost-benefit analysis of that.   Attacks on "madatory insurance" or "government health plan" are red herrings.