Yahoo News: “Hillary Clinton also has called for Guamanians to be able to vote in presidential elections.” Guamanians?

My favorite image from the Daily Show clip that CrazyMonk linked to:

It looks like a Soviet propaganda poster. Hell, it looks like THIS Soviet propaganda poster:

Now, let’s combine them:

UPDATE: For CrazyMonk:

Governor Rendell, did Governor Rendell’s endorsement of Hillary Clinton make you, Governor Rendell, more likely to vote for Hillary Clinton? Absolutely.

Sure, Barack Obama may have bowled like something of a priss, but at least he knew to put his fingers in the ball’s holes:

The results of holding the bowling ball as if it were a shotput are predictable.

While there are a lot of spoofs of Hillary Clinton’s red phone commercial, I really liked this one:

Slate takes a quick jab at Ron Paul:

If you were designing the perfect candidate in a lab, you’d want John McCain’s personal courage, Mike Huckabee’s humor, and Hillary Clinton’s tenacity. The ingredient you’d want from Obama isn’t hope, which is, after all, hype. They all offer hope — even Ron Paul, in a creepy, Ayn Rand kind of way.

Hillary Clinton, humorist:

Through it all, Mrs. Clinton has not retreated into a shell. She asks her aides about their children, spouses and partners. She tries to keep the mood upbeat on the campaign plane, such as recently joking about how Ohio is so diverse that it sometimes feels like five different states.

Man, I love that “Ohio is like five different states” joke, it kills me every time. Hillary Clinton’s like a modern day Lenny Bruce.

I fear Hillack Obinton.

Depending on whose count you look at, the current Democratic non-super delegate vote is around 569 Clinton to 550 Obama (Clinton plus 19). How, I wondered, would this be different if Democrats awarded their delegates in a winner take all system?

Both the New York Times (on 11/18/07) and the Boston Globe (on 1/27/08) recently published pieces critiquing the graphic designs of various 2008 campaign logos. Considering that both papers are owned by the same parent company, one might expect them to have similar slants to the story. Here’s how the two compared:

NY Times on Hillary Clinton:

Boston Globe on Hillary Clinton:

The Hillary type palette is far from fresh and colorful; it is begging for legitimacy instead of demanding respect. It projects recycled establishment. The type has a tired feeling, as if the ink has been soaking into the page too long. The Hillary logo has the look of an ’80s newspaper layout or an investment company. The tall lower-case reminds me of someone with their pants pulled up too high. I wonder about the significance of the three stars and three stripes. A third term?

Comparison:

Both agree that the choices made were conservative. The Times however thinks the choices were interesting, the Globe finds them tired and recycled.

Read more »

Hi, I’m Troeltsch. You may have seen my comments in this blog, and if you read this blog regularly you probably know me in real life. To be clear, I am not the normal poster to this blog, so attack (or praise) me, not him, for the content of this post. In particular, if you feel like using part of this post as a pull-quote in your major magazine you’re more than welcome.

I wrote an email yesterday comparing the common voting record of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, as a means of picking a candidate to vote for in the Democratic primary. As you’ll see below, for cases where they differ I explain who I prefer based on my own political views, and then tally up the votes at the end. Read more »

I propose a new means of determining when a presidential candidate should be considered “serious” and be given access to debates and non-mocking media attention — when they poll better than someone who’s running for president sarcastically. Let’s call it The Sarcastic Line:

Last month, a national opinion poll found Bloomberg attracting 11% of the vote when matched against Clinton and Giuliani. That same poll showed Ron Paul earning 8% of the vote running as a libertarian. Comedian Stephen Colbert attracted 13% of the vote in a hypothetical match-up earlier this year.

Stephen Colbert was outpolling Ron Paul by 5% and hypothetical Bloomberg by 2%. It seems reasonable that if you can’t beat people who are running for office as an enormous joke, you don’t deserve to be taken any more seriously than they do. From now on, if you’re polling below a comedian (The Sarcastic Line), you’re going to be treated as a nothing more than a punchline.

PS. Ron Paul doesn’t help his case when people are scoring shots like this off of him: “At least part of his campaign makes sense: If Bush had Big Oil and Kerry had Big Labor, it stands to reason that Ron ‘Gold Standard’ Paul would be the puppet of Big Dirigible.”

Yet another 2008 candidate selector, this one is fairly quick. Here’s where I stand:

1. 21 - Ron Paul
2. 18 - Joe Biden & Rudy Guiliani
3. 17 - Chris Dodd & Dennis Kucinich
4. 16 - Obama & Clinton
5. 14 - McCain

Ah, Ron Paul. Now that I’ve used your name I’m sure your minions will arrive to call me stupid… like last time.

And while I’m still snickering about the giant robotic NAZI Hillary Clinton, check out this ridiculous product.

As promised, here are a few of my favorite pictures from today’s anti-war protest in Washington, DC (you can also check out the full gallery for lots more). Click on any picture to see a clearer version.

I don’t get this one at all. A giant robotic NAZI Hillary Clinton? What message are they going for here? Also, who’s first choice at an anti-war protest is to attack Hillary? Sure, she voted for the war, but there’s clearly bigger fish to fry. It makes me wonder if this was a right-winger who mistakenly showed up at the anti-war protest thinking it was the pro-war protest.

There were a lot of 911 conspiracy people at the event today. It must be very discouraging to try to throw a real, legitimate, anti-war rally, only to have your message undercut and rationality brought into question by the conspiracy wing.

Finally, a group that everybody can get behind.

The Ron Paul people were extremely well organized at the event. They outnumbered any other candidate faction by an order of magnitude. They were pitching him as the only candidate who voted against the war and against the PATRIOT Act. I was forced to wonder, though, whether any of the people who were supporting him were registered Republicans and/or able to vote in the Republican primary? Drawing support at the anti-war protest isn’t going to do much for you during the primaries.

This one shocked me. I have to imagine this was a real minority opinion.

And finally, I have no idea what these signs are supposed to mean (that was actually a common theme at the protest), but I like them!