Coulter and Custer

Coulter and Custer

Coulter and Custer

A mostly political Weblog.
Aug. 15 2006 3:46 PM

From Coulter to Custer

kf spans the cultural universe.

(Continued from Page 3)

Posting about the Lamont/Lieberman battle he helped start, Markos "I'm-just-all-about-winning" Moulitsas admits that

The DSCC and the DCCC will have to deal with the fact that this race will continue to suck oxygen from great pickup opportunities.

He gets points for bringing it up, though. Kos otherwise gloats effectively  and non-megalomaniacally. ... P.S.: But I do think Rahm Emanuel went overboard, as is his wont, with the "love child" comment. Bill Clinton campaigned for Bush's "love child"? A shift of three percent and Rahm would be endorsing Bush's "love child"? [You'd be defending that comment if Ann Coulter had said it--ed I think maybe Rahm's been listening to Ann Coulter.] ... 2:34 A.M. link

The Bad Date Theory: E-mailer Thomas Riehle, a partner in the bipartisan polling firm RT Strategies, writes:

August 8, 2006 is a date that political insiders should never forget.  It was the month and date that magnified the power of political outsider wings of both parties.

Club for Growth won contested Republican House primaries in Michigan and Colorado (the latter to the embarrassment of the Rocky Mountain News.  Note what missed—the photo caption still indicates the wrong guy winning). 

Lamont ousted Lieberman in the Democratic Primary, first time someone did something like that since Dale Bumpers, running a "smile and a shoeshine" campaign, ousted Arkansas' Fulbright in a primary (and for that matter, Bumpers had the advantage of being the incumbent governor, not a neophyte.)  ... [**]

The lesson:  Setting primary dates is the most insidery insider's decision there is—who pays attention to that debate, except the political establishment? And it turns out setting August primary dates is the most self-destructive thing a political establishment can do. 

He also asks: "Will history record that the first significant victory of was the defeat of a…..Democratic incumbent?" It's on the books! ...

**--Actually, Carol Moseley-Braun beat incumbent Alan Dixon of Illinois under surprisingly similar circumstances in 1992 (the controversy then was Dixon's vote for Clarence Thomas). See this well-done essay. ... [Thanks to S.S.12:14 A.M. link


Tuesday, August 8, 2006

TPM's Josh Marshall and I discuss what he calls the Lieberdammerung on We recorded it before we knew the Connecticut results ... but we guessed right! ... 10:40 P.M. link

Wow: Closer than expected! (And quicker than expected.) [via Kos] ... Update: Hotline notes that Lieberman's decision "late last week" to scale back his get-out-the-vote effort is now looking pretty stupid. ... Hotline also has the latest Hadassah-based rumors on Lieberman's possible Indie bid. ... 7:19 P.M. link

The people's bubble: David Sirota claims  "Washington lobbyists, Enron shills, and right-wing neoconservative ideologues in D.C." supported Lieberman because

They know that this could be the beginning of the end of the era where American politics is their exclusive property, where public policy is handed down from their gated communities in Northern Virginia ... [Emphasis added]

I may be getting myself into a Plano-like situation here, but are there lots of gated communities in Northern Virginia? I lived in the D.C. metro area for many years and don't remember them. ... I think Sirota's out of touch with the Beltway! He should get in more. ... 6:26 P.M. link

The "You Tube Campaign"?  I see where Ned Lamont's use of Web videos might have been very effective at keeping his troops entertained and scoring a few points against Lieberman. I don't see how this won or lost or even hugely affected the election. Is the idea that large numbers of actual voters watch these Web videos and get influenced by them? I doubt it. At least not yet. So how do they have an impact? ... P.S.: I think I know how blogs have an impact--they efficiently raise money and volunteers, they inspire candidates to run, they bring facts and arguments to light that are then broadcast to actual voters by the MSM. But unless the videos highlighted by Slate's John Dickerson got a lot wider distribution than I think they did, they didn't add all that much new to this equation. I must be missing something. ...   6:05 P.M. link