Having grown up in the Four Corners, I can say that Obama's Arizona ad has a decent chance of success if part of a full push. “Here's why.

Rachel Maddow

It is really refreshing to see a serious journalist finally outperform Jon Stewart as the best political interviewer. Her questions were neither soft-ball, nor confrontational. What they did is bring out new details and a better understanding of how a candidate thinks.

Bill Kristol bites the hand that feeds, blasting his employer, the New York Times.

Did anybody else catch Kristol on the Daily Show last night. The most telling parts of the interview:

Kristol saying everybody should just relax 'its only an election'. Stewarts reacts with complete shock and says something along the lines of 'yeah, like they have it has no consequences'.

But even more important than that Kristol flat out admitted that Obama would be a standard 'liberal president' not a socialist and that all the republican attacks are just ploys to fool people into voting for McCain. It was stunning.

Kristol really does just view the whole process as a game. He really doesn't see any consequence to what is being said or to who wins. And why should he, he's a child of privilage, who lives his life largely insulated from day-to-day troubles. The person or party in the White House has no real effect on him at all.

Sorry to hear that about Studs. Another passing of part of the "greatest generation," specifically related to his WWII work.

And, speaking of writers ...

For those of you who missed it, the Navajo people and the Southwest in general lost a heartfelt voice“with Tony Hillerman's death earlier this week.

Even now, Palin won't say if she'll vote for convicted felon Ted Stevens.

That's gosh-darned impolite, considering how much he did for her.

Stevens was asked about Palin's call for his resignation. He said he understands she doesn't mean it and he won't hold it against her. Because if there's one thing Ted Stevens is famous for, it's not holding things against people. ;)

Oh, and he still insists he's not technically "convicted."

Oh, as for college newspaper editorial boards, fat lot of good it's doing.

FiveThirtyEight had a link to a story from the Orlando Sentinel or some other Fla. paper. Youth voting, despite a GOTV targeted to Gainesville/UF and other college and university campuses, is it its normal abysmal level.

thorin-1,

I just watched the clip of that interview that Steve linked.

For me, the saddest part of the interview was Stewart saying he would have voted for McCain against Al Gore in 2000.

Damn.

Al Gore would have been a marvelous President.

I think we all know how a McCain Presidency would have turned out.

I wish Studs had lived another week to see his fellow Chicagoan become President-elect. Sad, sad news, but a life well and fully lived. It's hard to think of a Chicago without Studs in it.

Let's not despair about the youth vote yet (though I admit I am dubious). In talking about the election last week in class, my students gave me a hard time about completing a mail in ballot (we are in California). They said they wanted the full 'go to the polls' experience on election day.

And yet, I worry. What if the surf is good that day? What if the bar near campus is selling dollar tequila shots . . .? Student intend to do things -- like vote or come to your office hours -- but if a better offer comes up, well . . . whatever. Hope Barack isn't totally counting on them to win this thing.

Aww fuck, Studs Terkel's dead? I mean, I know he had to die eventually, but it's still a tragedy. I too wish he'd've made it until Tuesday.

Youth voting, despite a GOTV targeted to Gainesville/UF and other college and university campuses, is it its normal abysmal level. -SocraticGadfly

Got a link on that? I've looked all over 538 for it, unsuccessfully, and it runs counter to everything else I've heard about early voting turnout in general in Florida.

Wow, so Palin finally was willing to say that Stevens should resign... but she's not willing to say that she wont vote for him? How odd.

And yet, I worry. What if the surf is good that day? clarence

I hope you're the spanking kind of teacher. :)

clarance,

The youth vote (under 30) has dramatically increased each election since 2000. If they will turn out for John Kerry and a non-Presidential race in 2006 (when they were 17% of the electorate), they will turn out this year.

I expect to see 22%-25% under 30.

Doubtful, it was from the Sentinel and I think, though not sure, I saw it on FiveThirtyEight. Anyway, here you are. Youth vote info starts on last graf on first webpage.

Doubtful, it was on Electoral-Vote.com that I saw that, not FiveThirtyEight. It's linked in the lead story underneath the map.

RIP, Studs. I can't say enough about the man. I'm too sad to even start right now. God bles him, though. He was strong, funny, honest, tough as nails, proud to say what he was.

While we're at it, where's Bristol Palin been hiding at in recent weeks and why? Could it have to do with playing political/cover-up games over the length of her (current) pregnancy?

"For those Americans making under $100,000, and most do, Obama's tax cut is clearly bigger than McCain's."

Lame that Democrats need to pander to people so hard that we've adopted the "tax cuts for everybody, at all times" strategy.

And Studs'Working was a fun read.

David Brooks' answer to the global crisis of credit and confidence: Pave the Earth.

Studs Terkel was the kind of liberal I hope to be someday. He saw value in every life.

Question: Are the long lines for early voting caused by a fewer number of voting locations than will be available on election day?

me @ 6:34,

David Brooks' answer to the global crisis of credit and confidence: Pave the Earth.

The reference above is a little obscure, so (just in case) here's a link to the website spinoff of the original Internet Newsgroup.

Studs Terkel walks in Heaven with George Orwell and Murray Kempton. I'm dedicating my Obama vote to him.

One of the reasons I'm proud to be from Chicago: Studs Terkel.

And Dick Butkus.

TomJ, can't speak for other states, but yes, for Texas. For example, here in Dallas suburbs, each community of decent size has one early voting location place, while on Election Day, even a community of 50K or so will have two if not three.

I'm not even close to being from Chicago but I'll miss Studs too. Quality like that is damned near impossible to replace.

R.I.P. Studs, a foundation of Chicago.

Seconding that Butkus, and adding Walter Payton.

Pardon the aside.

Even now, Palin won't say if she'll vote for convicted felon Ted Stevens.

That the press is even asking her is a violation of her right to privacy.

Boehner is an embarassment to Ohio,the USA,The earth,mankind and the universe.

S'long, Studs, see you at the game. We're gonna win this one!

I liked it when Colin Powell endorsed Obama and said "so what if he is" regarding the whispering about Obama being a muslim. Who is going to stand up to Elizabeth Dole and say "so what if she (Kay Hagan) is (an atheist)"? I guess we're not there yet.

Studs' book "Working" affected me profoundly. Funny how so much of his writing still applies--perhaps even more so.

_______________________________________________

Maybe there will be a place on Obama's cabinet for Maddow!?
_________________________________________________

I really hope the ground game gets super serious in getting the vote out, ensuring folks know basic things like if they're in line, they get to vote, even if the polls' hours have expired. I heard several CNN talking heads seeming to not know this, feeling concerned that an eight hour line would be too long because by the time they get to vote, the polling place will close.
--------------------------------------------------

It's all very exciting, the turnout that's expected!

Be afraid, be very afraid.

Regarding medical insurance:

As Paul Krugman noted that "In short the McCain plan makes no sense at all, unless you have faith that the magic of the marketplace can solve all problems. And Mr. McCain does: A much quoted article published under his name declares that "opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation."

LIKE THEY DID WITH BANKING.... hold on....

McCain would deregulate insurance--and wreck the system.
Nobel Prize recipient Krugman says McCain would afflict the afflicted!

He says--AND PLEASE LISTEN-- McCain wants to destroy the health insurance of nonelderly Americans.

WAKE UP ALL YOU JOE THE PLUMBERS

I really hope the ground game gets super serious in getting the vote out, ensuring folks know basic things like if they're in line, they get to vote, even if the polls' hours have expired.

I don't know if this will be any comfort, but I got my Democratic voting guide here in California and there was a prominently displayed box explaining basic voting rights (like the line thing), telling people to demand a provisional ballot, and giving a toll-free number to call if they experience any problems.

If they're doing that in California where Obama is ahead by 20+ points, I can't imagine they're not doing it in the contested states.

I'll say it: So what if Kay Hagan(rhymes with pagan) is an atheist, agnostic, Wiccin, Zoroastrian, Scientologist, or even a...gasp...Mormon? What difference does it make? Hitler was a Vegetarian...guess he didn't eat the Jews, or whomever else he was supposed to have killed(no, I'm not denying the Holocaust). What does all this labelling accomplish? If Liddy Dole has it out for non-Deists, it is more a reflection on her intolerance or acceptance of others than on those she labels. She is running for an office to represent ALL of her constituents. She apparently cannot put her own judgments aside, so how is she going to represent those in her district who do not believe 100% as she does? So, I label her...unfit to run!

I am committed to Oneness through Justice and Transformation
peace,
st john

I once had an exchange with Mr. Terkel at a bus stop that I count among the most interesting conversations of my life. I was lucky to have had a few minutes with him, and we're all lucky to have had him for as long as we did.

He will be deeply missed.

I'll say it: So what if Kay Hagan(rhymes with pagan) is an atheist, agnostic, Wiccin, Zoroastrian, Scientologist, or even a...gasp...Mormon? What difference does it make?

To you, nada. To me, rien. To North Carolina in 2008, a lot.

We pick our battles, and in this case the battle is against a bad-faith (see what I did there?) lying-ass, out-of-bounds ad, not the underlying premise of the ad.

TG Chicago: Wow, so Palin finally was willing to say that Stevens should resign... but she's not willing to say that she wont vote for him? How odd.

Not so odd. Here's the scenario she has in mind: Vote for Stevens. Stevens wins. Stevens quits or gets booted out. There's a special election to replace him which, unlike Nov. 4th, can have a non-Stevens Republican running. Maybe even herself. Poof! Senator Palin.

John Henry: That the press is even asking her is a violation of her right to privacy.

Under ordinary circumstances, yes. But the question is fair, if only because it could shed light on the above scenario. And also because Palin has not been shy about saying how she'd vote on other issues. And also because Ted Stevens publicly campaigned for her in 2006, it's fair to ask if she'll return the favor in the smallest way.

Grumpy, I think John Henry was sarcastically riffing on Palin's wail that criticizing her criticism of Obama is abridging her "first amendment rights."

The uh-oh feeling...

Keep seeing stories about lines of early voters stretched around the block and waiting for hours...
Am I the only one getting a feeling that our democracy won't be able to handle the turnout Tuesday?

Here’s more of my take on the low youth vote turnout in Florida.

That the press is even asking her is a violation of her right to privacy.

There is no legal or moral "right to privacy" that protects the politicians from questions about their preference on public matters.

Drudge's influence may have waned, thank god/dess, but we still need to figure out what this is coming from and whether it is worth thinking about; whatever (and what about all those people who don't even answer polls? Thank god/dess for early voting!):

ZOGBY: MCCAIN MOVES INTO LEAD 48-47 IN ONE DAY POLLING

ZOGBY SATURDAY: Republican John McCain has pulled back within the margin of error... McCain outpolled Obama 48% to 47% in Friday, one day, polling. He is beginning to cut into Obama's lead among independents, is now leading among blue collar voters, has strengthened his lead among investors and among men, and is walloping Obama among NASCAR voters. Joe the Plumber may get his license after all...

One of the great things about being a young adult in Chicago in the 1970's was being able to listen to Studs Terkel's show on WFMT every morning. I got to meet him once at a party. Fantastic author, great man.

It seems hard the race would change so much in one day, and so here is what actually appears right at http://www.zogby.com/:

"
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby Poll: Obama 50.1%, McCain 43.1%
Race stuck in neutral

Released: 10-31-2008

Subscribers can login here: https://interactive.zogby.com/clickon/index2.cfm

Next Release: 11-01-08, 1:00AM

UTICA, New York—The race for President appeared to slip into neutral Thursday, as support for Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain moved only slightly in the last 24 hours, the latest Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby daily tracking telephone poll shows.

Part of one day’s worth of polling came after Obama’s 30-minute televised campaign pitch to voters on Wednesday, but voters didn’t seem to react one way or the other. The contest remained static with Obama garnering 50.1% support, compared to McCain’s 43.1%.

Undecideds or those who support other candidates increased slightly to 6.8% of the sample.

Even in the demographic subgroups, the race changed almost not at all. Including Election Day, there are five days left in the race.
"

So is Drudge just hallucinating, "smoking crack right now" as Bill O'Reilly once charged? Drudge must have seen something, somewhere, but what?

I hope you'll endure this post; I was going to write an editorial and try to get it published, but ran out of time. I thought I'd post it around a few places.

Obama’s glaring “Achille's Heel� for the aspiring objective military historians among us, is his self-described though weakly documented opposition to both the Iraq War Resolution and the Bush Administration’s invasion of Iraq. To iterate, that is Obama’s glaring Achilles’ heel, not his asset as a candidate. Please read on.
Barack Obama would have been willing to permit Saddam Hussein to possess weapons of mass destruction, nuclear and otherwise – exactly as Mr. Hussein proclaimed he had possession – and allowed Mr. Hussein to continue to pursue their development at his relative convenience during the years 2002, 2003, and onward, without deadline of any kind. This despite the overwhelming evidence that Mr. Hussein was a far more imminent threat than Adolf Hilter was in the years previous to World War II. In this way his dedication to appeasement surpasses that of Neville Chamberlain. Mr. Chamberlain had the excuse that he did not have himself from which to learn from his mistakes. Mr. Obama does have Mr. Chamberlain’s lesson but, unlike Mr. McCain, decided to ignore it in 2002 and 2003. This makes him beyond merely incompetent to be commander-in-chief, but utterly self-destructive. Those who disagree with this would deceive you and, ignorantly, patriotically, and/or otherwise … further irrelevantly, put this nation at dire risk.
Mr. Obama has sheepishly mumbled that he did not think the 2002-2003 WMD intelligence was accurate. I would surmise that is an outright lie, if not a despicable deception, and, in any case, absurd; but I do not know his mind exactly. It could be that Mr. Obama had two of his Illinois State Senate legislative assistants look into the Iraq-WMD issue independently and that he elected to credit their contrary conclusions to both the claims of Saddam Hussein and the conclusions of the NSA, CIA, DIA, and international intelligence community consensus. Or perhaps he intuited that Hussein was lying about possessing WMD and that the international intelligence community was absolutely wrong in which case I am amazed by his “powers of intuition� and wonder if we can expect him to intuit his national security intelligence information should he win election in 2008. This is something we ought to know before we put our security in the hands of Mr. Obama qua psychic. In any case, I challenge Mr. Obama or anyone to prove much less persuade effectively that the basis of Mr. Obama’s objection in 2002 or 2003 was the suspect nature of the WMD intelligence rather than his willingness to accept an effectively WMD-armed Saddam Hussein. As evidence otherwise, one would think he would have announced that to warn his fellow countrymen they were relying on incorrect information if he thought that was the case; after all, he would not have wanted Mr. Bush to “mislead� the United States, so it would seem. [Moreover only an imbecile or a quasi-pacifist would have doubted the 2002-2003 raw WMD intelligence enough to risk U.S. security based on those doubts.] But, in fact, Mr. Obama completely believed at the time that Hussein had WMD and still thought the invasion was a mistake, deciding to permit Mr. Hussein more and more time to develop WMD and the delivery systems, technological and paramilitary, to strike at the United States. [In fact, the fear in 2003 was that he would use the WMD he claimed to have on invading US troops. In this way the invasion though based on false intelligence at least spared our troops having to invade Iraq subsequently and face WMD.] This after Hussein was able to easily corrupt and thwart both U.N. inspections and sanctions at the expense of the security of the United States and the welfare of his people for 11-12 years (and, typically, the integrity of the U.N.). He must have studied his fellow fascist (the Baathist Party modeled on the Nazi Party) carefully in his dealings with the League of Nations and the United States in the 1930s.
This is no time for hyper-appeasement and Barack Obama. I’m voting for John McCain in November.

The Objective Historian

Logorrhea...

Ugh.
Clean up in aisle 11:35 please.

* Al Gore returns to the scene of the crime -- Benen

It's amazing to see just how many states this year are hanging on "by the skin of the teeth"... I'm in Virginia and the simmering excitement is almost literally palpable; more so, even, than when Allen macaca-ed himself in '06 and gave us the first ray of hope.

If we manage to pull it off, we'll be saying -- much like Michelle Obama -- "I'm proud of my state, for the first time in a long while". And just the possibility of so many states patting themselves on the back for the accomplishment is exciting...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* When Liddy Dole falls in a ditch, she keeps digging. -- Benen

As an atheist, I get ever so fed up with the overpowering role religion has assumed in American politics. I could stomach it -- though barely -- when it was garnish; now, when it seems to be the main dish, five days out of seven, I really feel sick to my stomach most of the time. Religion (or lack thereof) should be a *private* matter. One can be moral (ie follow all the "do not-s") without being a believer. And vice versa (as we've seen all too many times).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Keep seeing stories about lines of early voters stretched around the block and waiting for hours...
Am I the only one getting a feeling that our democracy won't be able to handle the turnout Tuesday? -- koreyel, @21:23

It may be difficult, but, in some ways, it may actually make Tuesday easier. In my own little VA town, we had 200 new voters registered for this election (ca 8% of the total). By Wednesday, when I went for my second dose of training on the -- New! Improved! Pox on it!-- electronic poll book, the Registrar said she's already had 320 people voting absentee (our version of "early") -- more than the new registrations (in the past, the maximum was around 50). I'll find out tomorrow, at my refresher -- got my assignment today and I *will* be working the poll book, so I'd better get things straight -- the final number of absentee voters. But, given that we've more than doubled the number of machines which will be used and that poll book workers number will be doubled also, we ought to be able to cope with the turnout, even if it is heavier than usual.

I suspect that similar safeguards are in place throughout the country. The numbers for some of the states which allow early voters are staggering; anywhere from a quarter to more than half of registered voters had chosen that route. Once you remember that, in many places, the number of "regular" precincts are about three times the number of early ones, the long lines at the early ones should indicate more-or-less normal flow in the regular precincts on Tuesday. Ie still shitty in lots of places but no worse than in '04 or '06 (that one was heavy here, with Macaca and Webb duking it out).

Obama's gonna have *thousands* of watchers making sure there are no shenanigans going on. And, unlike Gore, he'll never concede an iffy result. Worse comes to worst, the Congress will determine the winner. One vote per member; no effing "electors" And, in January, the Congress will be bluer than Paul Newman's eyes... :)

I’m voting for John McCain in November. Posted by: The Objective Historian

Who cares? Vote for him everyday (or "Everday").

And, by the way, not one intelligence agency in the West ever thought that Iraq had WMD. They could find no evidence of weapons programs prior to the invasion. This was publicly knowledge by late in 2003. I was always a lie.

Contrary to its statement, it wasn't the lack of time that stopped our "Objective Historian" (anyone calling him/herself "objective" is like people calling themselves "maverick" -- the truth of the matter is, immediately, suspect), @ 23:35, from publishing its "editorial" elsewhere... It was the lack of common sense and basic education. Why, even I, a foreigner, for whom English is a second language, can do a better job of writin' in it...

As an atheist, I get ever so fed up with the overpowering role religion has assumed in American politics. I could stomach it -- though barely -- when it was garnish; now, when it seems to be the main dish, five days out of seven, I really feel sick to my stomach most of the time.Posted by: exlibra

And what's so irritating about this is that Americans really aren't all that religious. While some 80% claim they believe in god, less than 40% attend religious services of some kind on a regular basis. If one could do the survey, I imagine it would show that on Sundays more people are either watching sports on television or attending sporting events than there are people attending church. I bet the ratio is 4-1.

I think Maddow is headed for something more...I really hope she is. I don't know I've seen such a combination of grace, intellect, passion and ability to convert that which matters into a digestible fashion.

She has allowed me to feel more than okay about just caring again--I feel she validates my deepest concerns in a way that translates into something you can grab onto. In a way that tells you that you are not alone.

Maddow has the ablity to use her intellect to stay quite simple but yet poignant and potent and focussed on key concerns--this in itself is an incredible gift.

In so doing, she creates an opening in listening for a much broader audience--that for example, what Bush is trying to push through the last minute...and yet she does it with such humanity...

Rachel Maddow lends such intelligence and passion and decency and cogency to the issues of the day, that I dare say they are hard to ignore for many.

Two sad losses this week! Many years ago I saw Studs Terkel face off in a revival of a Bughouse Debate in front of the Newberry Library in Chicago. He was a true character. And Tony Hillerman is one of my favorites now that we live in NM. Sigh.

It is palpable and powerful...

Exlibra...

I hope you are right about the country being prepared for the huge turnout. My sense is that Tuesday marks an absolute renaissance in the American experiment. We've reached a tipping point in expectations. The subsurface excitement is bubbling and boiling...

Between now and Tuesday...
Who can think of anything else?
Not me. Not you. Not the country.

Quite frankly, my sleep last night was torn apart by nightmares of a McCain victory.
I hope to sleep better tonight.......

(ex)Libra - Thanks for your accounts from the polls. Looking forward to your reporting through the election.

I too though Maddow did a great job in interviewing, which, from my perspective as a journalist by training, should be regarded as just the norm -- in a reality-based world. What instead really struck me about her interview was Barack. His remarks were so well-considered, thoughtful and informed, he seemed as if from another generation. Bush-McCain-Palin have set such low bars for public officials that plain old competence suddenly seems stunningly refreshing. If you haven't gone to your local Barack office to volunteer yet, it's time to do something before you regret not having done enough.

OK, I got a few things.

@ clarence

I'm 60 and my dreams lie with the youth. Of course they will vote. This election is about the young. Our future as humans is about the youth. Were you never young? Geesh!

And then there is Studs. I thought he would live way longer than me. I'm trying to imagine life without Studs Terkel. I am sad sad sad. Thanks Mr. Terkel for being one great guy. I'm missing you so much already.

and, I am a North Carolina voter and I did write senator Dole and tell her just how disgusting she is. I walked straight to early voting and voted for Kay Hagen. NC needs a new Senator. Dole and Burr both make my stomach growl!!

Bush's last big dig at the environment.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/30/AR2008103004749.html?hpid=topnews

Some quotes:

"The White House is working to enact a wide array of federal regulations, many of which would weaken government rules aimed at protecting consumers and the environment, before President Bush leaves office in January. The new rules would be among the most controversial deregulatory steps of the Bush era and could be difficult for his successor to undo."

"Those and other regulations would help clear obstacles to some commercial ocean-fishing activities, ease controls on emissions of pollutants that contribute to global warming, relax drinking-water standards and lift a key restriction on mountaintop coal mining. Once such rules take effect, they typically can be undone only through a laborious new regulatory proceeding, including lengthy periods of public comment, drafting and mandated reanalysis. "They want these rules to continue to have an impact long after they leave office," said Matthew Madia, a regulatory expert at OMB Watch." ... "He called the coming deluge "a last-minute assault on the public . . . happening on multiple fronts."

"In some cases, Bush's regulations reflect new interpretations of language in federal laws. In other cases, such as several new counterterrorism initiatives, they reflect new executive branch decisions in areas where Congress -- now out of session and focused on the elections -- left the president considerable discretion."

"Through the end of the Clinton administration, we were working like crazy to get as many regulations out as possible," said Donald R. Arbuckle, who retired in 2006 after 25 years as an OMB official. "Then on Sunday, the day after the inauguration, OMB Director Mitch Daniels called me in and said, 'Let's pull back as many of these as we can.' " Clinton's appointees wound up paying a heavy price for procrastination. Bush's team was able to withdraw 254 regulations that covered such matters as drug and airline safety, immigration and indoor air pollutants. After further review, many of the proposals were modified to reflect Republican policy ideals or scrapped altogether."

"Many of the rules that could be issued over the next few weeks would ease environmental regulations, according to sources familiar with administration deliberations.... Two other rules nearing completion would ease limits on pollution from power plants, a major energy industry goal for the past eight years that is strenuously opposed by Democratic lawmakers and environmental groups. One rule, being pursued over some opposition within the Environmental Protection Agency, would allow current emissions at a power plant to match the highest levels produced by that plant, overturning a rule that more strictly limits such emission increases. According to the EPA's estimate, it would allow millions of tons of additional carbon dioxide into the atmosphere annually, worsening global warming. A related regulation would ease limits on emissions from coal-fired power plants near national parks. A third rule would allow increased emissions from oil refineries, chemical factories and other industrial plants with complex manufacturing operations. These rules "will force Americans to choke on dirtier air for years to come, unless Congress or the new administration reverses these eleventh-hour abuses," said lawyer John Walke of the Natural Resources Defense Council.

These people are nothing but pure spite.

So much for being "a uniter, not a divider"-

As a military historian, let me take issue with Obective Historian's objectivity and history. I think "Fascist Fictionalist" is a better handle. Yow.

The Objective Historian indeed has a history here at Political Animal....usually s/he types in all caps. I am surprised that s/he has found the Shift Key.

TOH has always been a RW Talking Point Shill. Those of you who came over with Steve and Hilzoy should know that TOH is not worth reading, nor responding to. Typical dittohead with a jonez for the neo-con rant.

ExLibra, I'm in Memphis, TN , a very blue city in a very blue county of a very red state,but with a Dem Gov. I'm a poll worker for Obama on Tuesday, so if he's that concerned about my little corner of the world on election day, he is not taking anything for granted.I say this because we have no gubenetorial election, or even a close Senate election.

There will be hundreds of us at the polls (in 3 hour shifts) just in my county. So, in the state we'll have a thousand or so.
He wants to ensure every vote will count and be counted. He's looking for a mandate and that requires actual votes.

My guess, across the country there will be 1,000,000 of us "poll watchers" and close to 100,000 attorneys. So even in places like TN and SC and SD and Utah and OK he wants to ensure everyone who is elegible and wants to vote can vote and that each of their votes are counted.

I know you've been working for Obama and the Dems in your state for months and have always enjoyed your tales from the field. So I hope I'm able to reassure you that Obama and the Dems are fighting for every vote in every state.

And honestly, before 9 your time when VA and NC are called for Obama, our long national nightmare will truly be over. The fun we'll have on Tuesday will be in seeing the blue seepage onto the state map and in counting up our new Senators and Congresscritters.

On Nov 6th or even Jan 22nd we need to start dealing with election day 2012 and with dragging Obama and our Congress into the progressive/liberal side. they will need to be lead.

I like Maddow but her constantly trying to prove how Obama is going to lose just so she can be right is irritating. I didn't think her interview was excellent. I felt like she was baderging Oabama and seemed like trying to trip him up on Pakistan for instance. I've been one of her biggest fans until recently and now I take her with a grain of salt. So many things she could have brought up besides those things of republican interest. Gives voice to Pat Buchanan for god's sake...enough is enough of that guy's exposure when there are so many people she could have on. Since she's got her face show she seems disingenuous and that sums up the attitude she had with Obama's interview as well. I just thought she would have asked better questions. It was ok but not excellent...though he still came off pretty smooth. btw...she stated on her radio show last week that she thought McCain was definitely going to win. (Only if he steals it Rachel).

bjobotts: I have to agree. She is trying too hard to be an objective journalist. Having Buchanan on the show, being negative about progressives.

She has made it. I want her to berself again.

berself=be herself. I dropped the mouse.

Sigh

"Even now, Palin won't say if she'll vote for convicted felon Ted Stevens."

May be the best sign that she thinks the election is over and she is going back to Alaska.

Forget the political static for a few minutes... but we should NEVER forget Studs Terkel.

He chronicled the dignity of the life of the 'average' person in a way that had never been done before and most likely never will be done again.

A life well lived.

Barack Obama would have been willing to permit Saddam Hussein to possess weapons of mass destruction, nuclear and otherwise -- exactly as Mr. Hussein proclaimed he had possession -- and allowed Mr. Hussein to continue to pursue their development at his relative convenience during the years 2002, 2003, and onward, without deadline of any kind.

So your contention is that if Saddam Hussein had actually had any weapons of mass destruction, even though he didn't, then Obama would have reacted the exact same way that he did when he knew that Saddam didn't have those weapons?

You fail Logic 101. Congratulations!