"I'm GGG and I approve this message."

[SlaveNoMore]

Hank Chinaski
I'm not sure she likes guys.

ZING!!!!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Kos says vote for Mitt in Michigan.

Who will you be voting for, Hank?

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
Kos says vote for Mitt in Michigan.

Who will you be voting for, Hank?

"And we want Romney in, because the more Republican candidates we have fighting it out, trashing each other with negative ads and spending tons of money, the better it is for us. We want Mitt to stay in the race, and to do that, we need him to win in Michigan."


Ah yes - the "fuck with the other side" approach.

And people wonder why politics are in the sewer.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Kos says vote for Mitt in Michigan.

Who will you be voting for, Hank?

This has been all over the blogs, but has it been picked up by the real press in Michigan?

Given the Republican history of screwing around in Michigan (to the benefit of their soulmate, George Wallace, for example), and the fact that Michigan has a sizable crew of angry unemployed folks, it could conceivably catch on. But if it's just Kos and the bloggers, well, that might have some small influence in Ann Arbor.

But Kos should be careful what he wishes for. I don't think anyone can predict what is going on well enough to know whether Romney votes will help or hurt the Rs as a whole.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
"And we want Romney in, because the more Republican candidates we have fighting it out, trashing each other with negative ads and spending tons of money, the better it is for us. We want Mitt to stay in the race, and to do that, we need him to win in Michigan."


Ah yes - the "fuck with the other side" approach.

And people wonder why politics are in the sewer.

I don't like the "fuck with the other side" approach (?), nor do I agree with the premise that a continuing campaign is bad for the candidates in it. For the most part, the candidates on both sides are smart enough not to be trashing each other, and I think the competition makes them better.

That said, I would prefer Mitt to be the GOP nominee, because he would be the best president of the bunch.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
That said, I would prefer Mitt to be the GOP nominee, because he would be the best president of the bunch.

The problem with internet bulletin boards is that sometimes it's hard to tell whether a post is tongue-in-cheek or head-in-ass.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Kos says vote for Mitt in Michigan.

Who will you be voting for, Hank?

you told us you didn't read daily Kos

what else have you been lying about? what is your login at DU? You're IMPEACHANDCASTRATE, aren't you?

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
The problem with internet bulletin boards is that sometimes it's hard to tell whether a post is tongue-in-cheek or head-in-ass.

I assume the bunch was limited to GOP candidates and that Ty assumes a non-trivial chance of a GOP victory this fall.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
you told us you didn't read daily Kos

I don't, but Josh or Atrios linked to that.

Originally disapproved by Gx3
The problem with internet bulletin boards is that sometimes it's hard to tell whether a post is tongue-in-cheek or head-in-ass.

The best of the GOP bunch. I would rather be stuck with Presidenti Romney than President McCain, because McCain seems to see an aggressive foreign policy (read: war) as a positive end in itself. He's not quite as dangerous as Giuliani, but he's heading there.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

This one seems better than most, but who knows?

Apparently I'm closest to John Edwards and farthest from Fred Thompson. I'm southeast of Obama and east or slightly northeast of the other Dems. Some of the questions are hard to answer, and tweaking my answers a bit might change things a lot. My brother, whose views are pretty similar to mine, says he's on the right side of the y axis, while I'm on the left side.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I don't, but Josh or Atrios linked to that.



The best of the GOP bunch. I would rather be stuck with Presidenti Romney than President McCain, because McCain seems to see an aggressive foreign policy (read: war) as a positive end in itself. He's not quite as dangerous as Giuliani, but he's heading there.

Based on having the guy as Governor, I'd say you should make absolutely no assumptions about what he believes or what he is capable of. He is an ungrounded opportunist, which can be a very dangerous guy to have in the White House.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
This one seems better than most, but who knows?

Apparently I'm closest to John Edwards and farthest from Fred Thompson. I'm southeast of Obama and east or slightly northeast of the other Dems. Some of the questions are hard to answer, and tweaking my answers a bit might change things a lot. My brother, whose views are pretty similar to mine, says he's on the right side of the y axis, while I'm on the left side.

Ron Paul, baby! Given they way the circle is drawn, saying I'm furthest from Obama seems to be a bit misleading (i.e., they all seem to be along the same distance arc.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
He is an ungrounded opportunist, which can be a very dangerous guy to have in the White House.

I know. Look what the 90s got us.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Based on having the guy as Governor, I'd say you should make absolutely no assumptions about what he believes or what he is capable of. He is an ungrounded opportunist, which can be a very dangerous guy to have in the White House.

He seems to have no principles or core beliefs, which scares me less than some alternatives.

As Yglesias says:

• I would much rather live under President Clinton or President Obama than under President Romney, but I'd take President Romney over President McCain or President Huckabee. Romney's a pathetic liar and he's running on a shitty agenda, but in a pinch you can say that the man has a track-record of managerial competence that Huckabee and McCain distinctly lack. Meanwhile, Romney appears not to quite have either McCain's zeal for war or Huckabee's zeal for not knowing what he's talking about. So there's really no downside to going and casting a ballot for Romney.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Ron Paul, baby! Given they way the circle is drawn, saying I'm furthest from Obama seems to be a bit misleading (i.e., they all seem to be along the same distance arc.

The three Ds listed (other than Obama) are essentially indistinguishable, based on their overlapping photos. And the Rs aren't very far apart, either.

I am like Ty, supposedly. On another one I was closest to Obama and Thompson was at the bottom.

ETA I don't think that I necessarily would want to vote for someone who most closely met my policy preferences. A weaker leader who 100% matches me is, IMO, not going to serve me as well as a much stronger leader who 75% matches me.