Re: WashPost article...
"Black women were always in the workforce. Even if part of that workforce was the work of raising white women's children.

Word. I think Steinem & Co. tend to forget this important fact.

But in the racism v. sexism debate, there will never be a clear winner...

Um, I kind of want to have sex with Barllary.

@Archetype: That's EXACTLY what I thought when I clicked on this link. Hillarrack is kind of gorgeous and I don't even know if that makes me a lezebel or not.

@Archetype: I'll second that.
I never thought that I'd be agreeing with that, but damn. Barllary is hot.

@tscheese: OMG Hillarrack is way better. I've always sucked at the combining names thing....

"November's election could be, for the first time in a very long time, a choice between two radically different visions of U.S. global engagement."

Didn't Kerry v Bush offer a difference of ideas like that?

Is that John Edwards' haircut?

Is it just me, or does Barillary look just like Janeane Garofalo?

@linkypoo: I was going to say Amy Sedaris, but now that you mention it, yes, yes he/she does.

@tscheese: I vote for Hillarak. (S)he is hot.

@aspiringexpatriate: The article will answer that question in longer terms, but surely the short answer is: no? Kerry seemed to represent the Democrats' desire for a candidate who could compete on Republicans' grounds -- "if he's a war hero, they can't call him soft." (Clever Republicans realized they could just call him ... not actually a war hero, a smear that probably resonated, in part, because Democrats were so eagerly touting him as one!)

Yeah, cuz it all came down to California the last couple of times.

What's that you say, Ohio and Florida? Shhhhh...Obama will carry you on the wings of change.

Puerto Rico WTF?! We don't even vote in the general elections.

Yeah, sorry, too much schadenfreude to feel sorry for all the finance folks being laid off. Though I do have to wonder how this will effect the recent trend amongst my artsy girlfriends of dating boring Finance Dudes.

@myrtlebeachbum: Umm, Bayh's argument in the article is not about Ohio/Florida, it's that Hillary is "ahead" in terms of the electoral votes of states won, 219-202. This is a pointless and somewhat desperate thing to claim to be "ahead" about, and it actually kinda backfires if you think about it too long, considering she's from New York.

He could talk specifically about states like Florida and Ohio, but then there wouldn't be any neat number to claim to be "winning" on.

@myrtlebeachbum: I read that "wind" not "wings" of change & now I have that damn Scorpians song in my head. (Now thinking Obama should replace that U2 song!)

@myrtlebeachbum: When was the last time a Democrat won Florida? I can't recall. Ohio has been a 50/50 state for awhile, too. Think I'll google that right now.

All of the solid big blue states will vote for whoever the Dem is... as long as the nomination is won fairly.

@sjct: Duh, oh yeah, Gore won Florida after all the votes were finally counted.

@sjct: Actually, all of the solidly big blue states will be Dem regardless of who the nominee is (or how it's won).

And technically, Gore would have won FL in 2000 if it hadn't been for those pesky chads. It's certainly not unreasonable to think that we have a chance in this election (or would have had a chance before the DNC decided to disenfranchise a whole voter base months & months ago).

@sjct: Didn't see this before I responded. And I think we've all tried to block our that election from memory, so understandable that someone would temporarily forget! :)

@Brigit: For real!!! WTF? the Democratic National Convention is one badly run, disorganized mofo! Why stage caucuses and primaries in US territories where people are unable to vote for President!! Puerto Rico, The US Virgin Islands and even freaking GUAM of all places hold primaries. There's even a special primary for Americans living abroad. That bearded red-headed News person from MSNBC, Chuck Todd, loves to make light of the fact that Puerto Rico has more delegates than a lot of US states like Winsconsin or something. I always find this to be sort-of borderline prejudiced ("typical wihte person speak!!"), but it is true, and majorly fucked up. Major.

It may not been the PA primary itself that does harm to either candidate's chances. It could be this long period of campaigning in which they are each tripping over their pasts.

That picture is what Sanjaya will look like in 40 years.

@briardahl: No need to preface your comments with an "um" unless it makes you feel better.

Senator Bayh's point is that superdelegates should strongly consider who carried the states with the most Electoral College votes before they cast their lot with Obama. There's nothing pointless or desperate about that, since that's how we elect our prez. I mentioned Florida and Ohio b/c they have been the deciding states before and because I think Moe's point that either Obama or HRC could carry California is irrelevant, since it just isn't going to come down to California. Purple states are where it's at.

That American Prospect article was really interesting, but it seems unlikely to appeal to anybody except the usual American Prospect crowd, i.e. dirty fucking hippies like me. Obama's attitude towards the war is WAAAAY more appealing to me than Clinton's. But I'd like either of them WAAAAY better than McCain.

It's not clear to me that any possible candidate is going to be able to bring back the troops very quickly. Iraq and Afghanistan are huge messes. Just bringing our troops back safely is going to take a while, much less leaving behind any semblance of stability. As a pacifist, grappling with the best way to do that gives me major headaches. I really have no clue what would be best, either for US or the Iraqis / Afghanis.

also, jezebelles and jezebeaus, is it time yet to back off on the horse-race style coverage? Or are we all cool with totally losing our marbles by the time the PA primary rolls around? I can't look away from the ongoing carcrash either, but it's definitely taking a toll on my well-being.

Who still has a beeper?

Barllary/Hillarrack (great monikers) is deliciously androgynous in the direct opposite of 1972 Bowie androgyny. But if a little glitter, fishnets and a feather boa or two show up along with a kneeling Mick Ronson, hey, I call that one helluva party.

@JSINAK: Dennis Duffy (aka Liz Lemon's ex-boyfriend, the Pager King). Jack Donaghy is still expecting that page from 1994.

@marin79: pagers are gonna come around any day now. It's cyclical, you know.

@nerdsausage is in the tank for SATAN: Never! I won't rest until I've told every Obama supporter that they're blissfully naive & they've told me that I'm a cynical Hillbot!

These posts weren't all bad back when we actually discussed the issues. That's what we should try to get back to!

@nerdsausage is in the tank for SATAN: I've pretty much checked out of it at this point. I voted, so there's not much else I can do.

@nerdsausage is in the tank for SATAN: Lol!

@JSINAK: Seriously though, back when I was an Ibanking analyst about 5 years ago, they gave us all pagers (too cheap to spring for the blackberries!) I hated that thing like none other (mostly b/c it went off at 3am with a message to get my butt back to the office).

@Brigit: It's called cheating. ;-)

@ceejeemcbeegee (just debatin' not hatin'): It's dumb as hell, but how is it cheating?

@marin79: From now on, this is all I'm going to say to everyone (stolen from Atrios): "Your decision to support your candidate demonstrates a profound degree of ignorance and obvious mental instability."

@briardahl: That's so not what I remembered of the campaign. I think I've gotten a distorted view of the last 10 years or so because I haven't had a TV for more than six months at a time.

Ah well.

To this day I never understood why more dems didn't like Kerry.

@Jezebabe: Totally random fact, and not on topic, but how's this for fair: the U.S. Virgin Islands are in the same Federal circut court as Philadelphia (3), and therefore all of the judges get to spend January and February down there hearing cases. This and other random facts are what I picked up in my honors pre-law class...plus we got an amazing private tour of the Supreme Court--did you know there's a basketball court on top of the main courtroom? It's referred to as the highest court in the land. Plus, Sandra Day O'Connor led an aerobics class there, as there's a whole gym up there.

/being a font of useless trivia

@marin79: Taaaaake mee....to the magic of the moment....on a glory night!

@sjct: Oooh ooh! I know. Gore won Florida 8 years ago. And you totally know we won Ohio too. Just that motherfucker Bush had shenanigans going on over there also. Fucker.

However, they should definitely give the nom to whomever is the popular vote leader at the end of this. And it'll probably be Barack. I don't see them EVER going against who won the popular vote. That'd be political suicide and an invitation for major chaos at the convention. I think Obama will take the nom for sure. It's clearly NOT against the rules to go after the superdelegates...it's the whole point of their existence. They can go against the pledged delegates or whatever (the way that Richardson, Kerry and Kennedy have gone against the winner of their states...but that's perfectly legit IMO). However, they'd be utter fools to overturn the will of the people. And I think at the end of this Obama will still have the most votes. He should for sure be the nominee if that's the case.

@SinisterRouge: are there two of you?

not that I disagree...

@nerdsausage is in the tank for SATAN: No. I've never wavered from that. I've never ever said that the person that wins the popular vote shouldn't win the nomination. I've always and will always believe that. I think that the chances of that person being Obama are quite high. But it's certainly not over yet. It's the idea that HRC would be "stealing" the superdelegates. Since that's an impossibility. Their whole point is to be a buffer between what they feel the voters chose and what they feel is best for the party. They are free to go against the popular vote/pledged deleagate leader if they so choose. However, it'd be total suicide for them and for the party. It would cause a schism beyond repair, IMO. It's one thing if HRC has the most votes when this is done. Then she has a real argument. But if Obama has more votes...he should definitely be the nominee. No doubt.

@marin79: Jokes babe, I got jokes and jokes and jokes and jokes....