Why Barack Obama Needs To Come To Arizona

Six days left in a campaign that feels like it has been going on for years; why would Barack Obama want to expend any of his fleeting time remaining going to Arizona, his opponent’s home state?

Because you play the game to win the game. That is why. And Senator Obama can win Arizona.

As my fellow contributors in the FDL collective will attest, I have been telling people for a long time that Arizona was a heck of a lot closer than they thought.

Guess what? Yep, Obama does indeed have a real shot, and suddenly a lot of people nationally have caught on to that fact. Pollster.com. DKos. Chuck Todd and MSNBC. And, best of all if you know Arizona politics over the last three plus decades or so, Bruce Merrill and the Cronkite8 poll. Dr. Merrill is the gold standard in Arizona polling, and he has a phenomenal record for accuracy.

The race here is yours to win Mr. Obama. But, it can go either way, it depends on you. If you would take just a brief amount of time, between now and next Tuesday, to drop into Phoenix for a quick rally, you can seal the deal. I can tell you with every ounce of conviction in my life; if you come, you likely win. The wave of victory is here, it just needs your personal final push.

Here is what you would gain:

• The ten precious electoral votes belonging to Arizona.

• A gigantic boost in excitement, motivation and energy in Arizona, the Southwest and among critical Hispanic voters. You can set the tone in this region for years to come with a victory this year in Arizona. Think of the future too.

• Coattails that take Arizona Democratic Congressional incumbents, as well as challengers Bob Lord and Ann Kirkpatrick, to victory.

• With a victory of Bob Lord over John Shaddegg, you substantially weaken conservative GOP House Leadership, making your ability to govern after inauguration a lot easier.

• Andrew Thomas (Maricopa County Attorney) and Joe Arpaio (Maricopa County Sheriff), a two man tag team that are a literal plague on the civil rights of all citizens here can be defeated with the push and excitement your appearance would generate. You have no idea how bad they are, and what their defeat would mean. You have fought this type of debasement of civil rights your entire life, this battle alone here is worthy of your time. Tim Nelson and Dan Saban can restore fairness and the rule of law here with your help.

• Most important of all, you unequivocally cement the hard mandate you will need to govern this country and accomplish the difficult policy changes necessary to lead us out of the darkness we currently face. Nothing will set your power in stone more than beating John McCain in his own backyard, and a historically conservative one at that. For so long, Democrats have been content to eke out wins and govern by a thread. Set the tone, send a message, instill the killer instinct, seize the day and seal the deal. Show the party how it is going to be done from here on out.

Senator Obama, it is all here for you. Come to Arizona; it is the right thing for you, and it is the right thing for us. Denver has nothing on Phoenix; if you come, we will be there just like they were in Denver, and we will all reap the spectacular, and once in a lifetime, benefits. It is all here waiting for you, but it will take your appearance.

Step up to greatness now. Seize the day; claim the ultimate mandate. Come to Arizona!

image_print
107 replies
  1. Loo Hoo. says:

    I hope he’s listening. Nothing would be quite as satisfying as an Arizona win.

    I like the red signs. Is that what the campaign will be showing during the last week? A mix of red and blue?

  2. azportsider says:

    Agreed, bmaz. A while back the Obama campaign unveiled a couple of new TV ads, and Steve over at Political Animal was seeking input on them from his readership. When I mentioned that I’d seen one in Phoenix and thought it effective, a number of other posters questioned why Obama was ‘wasting’ resources on Arizona. But Arizona’s always been in play; the out-of-staters just hadn’t figured that out yet.

    The delicious irony here is that the GOPers, with their maniac drive to promote growth in Arizona, have essentially sown the seeds of their own demise, as an awful lot of those new residents have brought left-leaning attitudes with them when they moved here from Minnesota, or Chicago, or California. The state’s slowly turning blue, and nobody–especially the Arizona GOPers–has noticed.

  3. TheraP says:

    What an eloquent and passionate appeal. It reads in a way like a travel brochure. But yes, it’s a political call to arms.

    May your call be heard and answered with your heart’s desire, bmaz!

    (how sweet an AZ victory would be!)

  4. Peterr says:

    Most important of all, you unequivocally cement the hard mandate you will need to govern this country and accomplish the difficult policy changes necessary to lead us out of the darkness we currently face. Nothing will set your power in stone more than beating John McCain in his own backyard, and a historically conservative one at that. For so long, Democrats have been content to eke out wins and govern by a thread. Set the tone, send a message, instill the killer instinct, seize the day and seal the deal. Show the party how it is going to be done from here on out.

    This is the big one — indeed, “most important of all” — and why I hope Axelrod & Co. are listening. At this point, in any election, it’s not only about winning but laying the groundwork for governing (should you win). A win in AZ would give Obama a big boost come January 21.

    Put it in bold, bmaz!

  5. Ishmael says:

    Bmaz, if McCain retires when his term expires in 2010 (or before, how great would that be!), who would be the best candidate for the Democrats? I’m assuming that McCain would be safe if he ran again, but maybe I’m wrong?

  6. lllphd says:

    Hm. I understand the logic, in addition to yours, EW, and it does make some sense.

    But I have to share my initial reaction: That would be brutal. McCain is losing already. You can see it in the polls, in the masses jumping ship, in the desperation, in his eyes and his voice and his posture.

    I know, I know; he has been brutal beyond belief, and there is no excuse for his actions. But somehow I just cannot see Obama doing that. It just does not mesh with who he is, in my opinion. I don’t think that says he’s a panty-waist or a woos; far from it. If Obama has shown us nothing else, it’s that he knows how to pick his battles wisely.

    This would not be a wise move. Kicking a man when he is down is nowhere in Obama’s repertoire; he will – you mark my words – offer McCain a hand and invite him into his closest advisement, I guarantee. This is the message I think I’m getting that this man has to offer us. Truly, in order to heal, we really must dispense with the blood-letting and commence with the healing. And that requires knowing what battles to pick, and when to walk away, and when to say it’s over now, let’s shake and work on recovering what is good in all of us.

    Again, I see all your points, but there is just no need for rubbing McCain’s face in it. Forgive me, as much as I confess to anticipating perverse glee in an AZ win on the one hand, on the other, more sober side of me, I want no part of roughing the guy up. We only need to win this, and then get on with the work at hand.

    So as the man says, let’s get to work. Not destruction. We’ve had far too much of that for eight – no, count ‘em, 28!! – years. I say we put it behind us and find ways to communicate with these folks. If we don’t, we will certainly have the devil to pay.

    • bmaz says:

      That is an Obama that I want to never see. That type of attitude is why the Republicans think we are losers. When you get your opponent down, step on his throat. Good god, I am so sick of the “okay we have won, let us back off and reach our hand out” attitude I could freaking puke. Throw these drowning jerks an anvil I say. And if you had two people in office like Joe Arpaio and Andrew Thomas wherever you live, and a visit from Obama could get them out, I would be begging for him to go there and get them out. You have no idea what hell those two cause, so wrongfully and egregiously. But thanks for putting some crappy sense of false comity over our civil rights and Obama’s ability to obtain the strongest mandate possible to govern.

      I apologize in advance for a pretty terse response, but this type of thought process is a fair amount of why the GOP always owns the Democrats, even when they are in the minority, and why Democratic Presidents like Clinton spend their terms under siege while rapacious GOP rubes like Bush are allowed to roam free to destroy the fabric of the world. Let us for once, just freaking once, do it right and clean up the field so we can govern.

      • brendanx says:

        It may be premature, but here’s what I think Obama’s idea of what is called “post-partisanship” really means: having a governing supermajority by breaking the Republican Party the way the Republicans have broken the Democrats into fighting liberals and Vichy Blue Dogs.

      • Professor Foland says:

        As I believe someone at TPM noted: if we can really crush McCain, then in future campaigns, Dems can counter the socialist-terrorist BS with, among other things, “those are the losing tactics of losers like loser John McCain, who lost, because he’s a loser who said loserly things like that”.

        Political consultants have a very clear history of over-reading the results of elections as the results of electoral tactics. In this case, they will take the lesson from the crushing McCain defeat that the low road doesn’t work any more. (I personally think this is the wrong lesson, but I’m happy if it’s the one they learn.)

      • IntelVet says:

        Well, you responded before I could, and said it much better, to boot.

        It is time the Ds quit stopping the fight when they are winning and try something different. Everytime they do that, they get punked. Stop it!

        It is an ugly fight. The only way to finish is with a KO. Like when hunting, never leave a wounded animal, so it is in politics.

        Professor Foland also explains very well what a likely outcome would be, showing, indeed, that the thugs and thieves hiding behind the Republican banner have no clothes.

      • james says:

        Look where being polite got Clinton. His failure to investigate the crimes committed during both Reagan/Bush administrations and Bush’s own impeachable crimes (invading Panama to silence a co-conspirator in drug smuggling) was repaid by an unending series of investigations and articles in right-wing owned and influenced (hello, New York Times) media until he was impeached even though 62% of the people were against such a move.

        The GOP never paid a price at the polls for disregarding the will of the people because it was doing the will of the base. The base of the Democratic Party is giving the party, I believe, one last chance to prove that it isn’t irrelevant.

        If Obama lets Pelosi and Reid continue their subservience to GOP manipulation, that’s the ;ast straw for me.

        • lllphd says:

          james, i do understand your sentiment, but not your logic here.

          just my opinion, but clinton did not make that decision about iran-contra to be polite, but politic (do not the etymological kinship there). in addition, in my opinion, clinton does not possess either the politeness or political sensibilities of obama. i could be wrong, but i’ve been watching very cautiously (psychologist; can’t help it), and i sense in him something more than what clinton possessed, something deeper and loftier.

          those sensibilities would just not permit him any consideration of the kind of reagan in your face behavior. what is that about? not deep, not lofty, that’s for sure. but definitely sandlot adolescent giggle glee.

          are we really talking about that here? the tactical stuff i can understand; that is definitely worthy of discussion. but stooping to the level of reagan in 84??

          why would we want to emulate that?

      • ekunin says:

        When it comes to politics Obama can give lessons. Weighing pros and cons, he probably decided he’d lose more by campaigning in McCain’s home state (his program is change and unity not confrontation) than he’d gain. I’m sure if he saw some good for him coming out of it, he’d be in Arizona in a heartbeat. I don’t understand why his appearance is necessary to turn the tide. Arizonians should vote for who they perceive as the better man without the necessity of a personal appearance.

        While I concede former Democrats wilted, there is no reason why Obama cannot hold out the hand of friendship to McCain, yes even after all he’s said and done. Magnanimity in victory would be a refreshing change. One can be magnanimous without being a patsy. Obama is no patsy. If we imitate the Repubs, all we get is more of the same.

        • DWBartoo says:

          There is a vast difference, ekunin, between genuine magnanimity
          and obsequious politeness.

          For too long a time, the lesser weevils have confused
          the two.

          As you say, Obama is no patsy.

          A lot of people do not realize that, as yet.

          But, really, this is about the people of Arizona who deserve to be
          considered, in our ‘calculus’, as well, don’t you think?

          How is it ‘unfair’ or not ‘nice’ to include them in Obama’s itinerary?

        • bmaz says:

          I don’t understand why his appearance is necessary to turn the tide. Arizonians should vote for who they perceive as the better man without the necessity of a personal appearance.

          Gee, then why should he campaign anywhere? since everybody is so brilliant and informed, he should not be disturbing anybody’s state then should he? Shouldn’t everybody “vote for who they perceive as the better man without the necessity of a personal appearance”?

          Why is he appearing anywhere? Please tell me! And unless you have a pretty damn good answer for that question, then tell me why the interests of my state are so much lesser than those of yours or anybody else’s? Please tell me! Why isn’t helping out Democratic challengers here important like it is everywhere else? Please tell me! Why isn’t getting rid of the most right wing fascist sheriff and county attorney tandem in the nation, that have over the years cost the state over a $100 million dollars and untold shame not worthy? Please tell me!

          I await your reply.

      • lllphd says:

        hm. gosh, bmaz, did not intend to get your blood pressure up. i would like to keep things civil.

        not to put too fine a point on it, but did you read the way you responded to me? did it remind you of anything?

        it is precisely that sentiment i am convinced we absolutely MUST work to overcome, not just in our adversaries, but in ourselves.

        look at what you wrote, man; it was ALL ABOUT WINNING!! “this is why the republicans walk all over dems,” and words to that effect. isn’t this precisely what we have been hating about the republicans for so long??

        i have a great deal of respect for you, and don’t want to get into a brawl about not getting into a brawl. but do hear me out.

        this election is, as you know, about far more than winning, and it is about far more than winning this election. i did not mean to ignore the specific nightmare you are suffering in AZ, and i do hope there is maximum dem power on tuesday there.

        but here is the way i would predict obama would calculate such a thing. there is nothing to be gained by humiliating your adversary when you are winning. this is just a universal rule of civility. the far- and forward-reaching consequences are horrifying. this is precisely why we are so reviled in iraq, for chrissake.

        and this is why it is so wise to keep our enemies closer even than our friends, something i had meant to mention in my original post. there is nothing to be gained in the larger scope of what we want to accomplish in this country by alienating our opponents with such in-your-face brutality. except that momentary rush of victory. then what? can we really govern with that kind of blood on our hands? will others follow such an example? god help us if they do!

        forgive me, my man – and i want to say again here how much respect i have for you – but that attitude is not what i for one want this country to be about. we have suffered through more than 8 long years of that (i count since reagan, and especially since the 94 repug takeover, but who’s counting?), and i want it to stop. now.

        i happen to believe that obama falls somewhere near what i just described in terms of the bigger picture, the more encompassing scope. and quite frankly, THAT is why i am voting for him. no, not true entirely. i’m voting for him for numbers of reasons that get discussed here on a daily basis. but the intensity of commitment and, yes HOPE that i feel, increasingly and powerfully, so much that i am brought to my knees in tears of joy and relief, yes RELIEF that this divisiveness, this animosity, this outright hatred overwhelming all of us, it just might have a chance of receding. because now, after watching obama for all these many months, my vote yesterday for him was actually no longer so much about all those reasons we discuss here regularly, but about the recognition that he is actually living the change i want to see in myself. i no longer wish to scrap. i no longer wish to bloody my backward neighbor. i no longer believe i could know peace in a brutal win.

        i don’t mean to minimize the importance of how obama’s presence could rally AZ and replace corrupt republicans with hopefully better democrats. honestly, i don’t. but, thinking from a more global calculus, obama must keep the bigger picture in mind. it still makes sense to me that he must consider how people – ALL people – would feel about his rubbing mccain’s face in it by stumping there. mccain has never considered going to IL, and of course that’s different given the numbers, but you see where i’m going with this. it’s a backfire waiting to happen, and it’s not worth it.

        here’s the thing. AZ may actually pull this off without obama’s presence there, which in a way would be even better. if not, with an obama win in general, there is still the likelihood arpaio and thomas will be gone next cycle or even earlier (as corrupt as they are, a new USatty there might well be rid of them soon, and by sending them to jail instead of home).

        but consider the consequences if obama does show up and those two stay in office. who is then humiliated? especially if mccain manages to carry AZ anyway! to my mind, that is not a possible consequence i would advise obama to risk, especially when compiled with the likelihood of humiliation and alienation simply showing up to campaign in AZ would cause, not just for mccain but for all his supporters. and quite frankly, much as i love ya dude, and much as i think i love AZ (never been there; plans for the spring), it’s just not worth the risks as i have listed them.

        again, i don’t want to diminish your anguish down there; been following those two evil scoundrels since early in the gitmo phase, and they are demons. but their power is diminishing, especially if we maintain the high road at every turn. i just beg of you, resist with all your might the temptation to OWN the republicans the way you resent the republicans owning the dems. this is not what it is about. these pitched battles will ceaselessly recur and cycle and recycle for all eternity until each of us makes the firm decision to STOP falling into behaviors we despise in our adversaries. again, my apologies dude, but there you are. and there i have been and will likely find myself again. but i recognize it, not just from 2000 in FL or from DC in 94, but from all the way back to watergate. the humiliation and resentment from that have been seething in republicans all this time, and it made utter monsters of the party, tempting them into believing that corruption and means-justify-ends dirty tricks are worth selling your soul. monsters, all of them. and it could be any of us; the political label does not identify or protect us from those evils. i beg of you, do. not. flirt. with. that. that self-consuming fire. you are a far better person than that. we all are.

        i agree with cinnamonape that going to AZ would not be fighting dirty, but it would be winning dirty. for all the reasons i put out there, we do not want to go there. please, at least consider how important it is to actually see the leadership in this man’s vision and more importantly in his actions, his behavior, and seek a higher goal. i don’t want to OWN the republicans or this country; i want to SHARE it.

        all that said, i do hope we finally get around to pursuing the criminality this administration has perpetrated on so damn many levels it just takes the breath away. and not in a good way. but i’m beginning to see the wisdom of building a solid, unified, and educated front first and foremost. and trust me, i have been as rabid and gnashing at the teeth as anyone.

        but that has eaten me alive. i am sick of it. i love this country. i love this world. i love my neighbors, even the poor slobs who will vote for mccain. i’m tired of the divide and the conquer and the over-heated TV pornography and the nasty uncivilized arguments. this from a consummate debater here; i love a good debate, i admit. but i’m tired of the orthogonal realities, the never-meeting twains, the fights that can’t make any sense because no one can agree on the facts or the rules. it’s exhausting us all, it’s actually killing us all.

        it won’t end by beating our enemies into submission (iraq images again; did that work?). it won’t end by owning the republicans or the hill or the ‘hood. it will only end when we can bring ourselves to arrest those base but understandable impulses as often and as quickly as we can and really project our thoughts beyond the passion of that moment and consider the consequences. like a chess game. or poker.

        sorry; this is definitely a serious stream of consciousness in progress, and i don’t mean to rebuke your feelings and thoughts any more than you meant to rebuke mine. i just don’t believe what you’re proposing – both specifically in AZ and generically in our politics – will bring us peace. and i don’t think it shows wisdom.

        there’s a better way. so this one is gonna be watching the moves of that one. because he seems to seek both wisdom and peace, far more than winning.

  7. Professor Foland says:

    Speaking of winning, I don’t think the effects of a rally would be limited to Arizona. (And I’ll admit, until just this week, I really did not believe in Obama having a chance, so you were right bmaz, I was wrong.) Obama in Arizona would pretty much force wider MSM discussion of recent polls showing AZ very close. I think wider discussion of “OMG Obama could even win Arizona” would add some electricity to people who otherwise might think they don’t need to bother to go to the polls on Tuesday.

    There’s also something to be said for projecting the “confident winner” image to bring over undecideds.

    BTW pollster.com shows an 8 point McCain lead, but I think that’s dominated by an M+21 Rasmussen poll almost a month ago.

    • bmaz says:

      You are so right; an appearance here this late in the game would electrify this state and the Hispanic vote throughout the Southwest. The effect would be palpable; and while the effects might be strongest in Arizona and the Southwest, it would send a signal, as you say, of a confidant man ready to win and govern that would have at least some impact nationwide.

      The media would eat it up; might be the single biggest thing he could do to claim the biggest media piece of the nut possible.

  8. perris says:

    bmaz, someone needs to get this post to the obama campaign, I do believe it would not taker very much to get him to pay a visit, this post might do the trick

  9. klynn says:

    It would quite neat to see Obama make a visit here at EW’s and give bmaz a personal answer of, “Yes!”

    I can dream…

    Thanks for the post bmaz.

  10. randiego says:

    That is an Obama that I want to never see. That type of attitude is why the Republicans think we are losers. When you get your opponent down, step on his throat.

    Get ready be disappointed. I agree with you, and I do think that Obama is smart enough to see a few moves ahead in terms of what’s in store for him and how best to deal with that. He’s proven to be a different kind of Fightin’ Dem.

    His history shows otherwise, however. That Frontline special on the candidates highlighted his election to President of the Harvard Law Review and how his supporters were shocked at how he ‘reached across the aisle’ afterward.

    McCain as an advisor? I doubt it, but I don’t doubt something similar in nature.

    • Bluetoe2 says:

      Actually McSame would poop in his own pants. Obama taking Arizona would be the exclamation point of the publics repudication of the “Reagan Revolution.”

  11. DWBartoo says:

    A word to the wise …

    When bmaz speaks, Barack, ’tis wise to listen.

    When bmaz offers suggestions, Barack, ’tis wise to follow such advise.

      • DWBartoo says:

        Footaball, TexBetsy, is a topic well beyond my meagre grasp.

        Pigskin expertise, lies with better, far more accomplished, souls than I.

        As to bmaz’es expertise on gridiron ’stats’ and ‘implications’, I shall have to take a pass, and allow someone else to tackle that goal …

        • bmaz says:

          Come visit the weekly trash talk at EW. We are guaranteed to either make you a genius or a dunce on sports; no guarantee which it will be as we are in a constant state of flux in that regard ourselves.

    • bmaz says:

      Well, i am not good for much; but I am a native here (which puts me a couple of decades more experienced than McCain here) and I have a pretty decent feel for this state. You can just palpably sense and feel how close this really is. There is no energy for McCain writ large; but there is a huge amount of Obama potential energy just waiting to be released. If he were to come here, it would break the restraints and carry him to victory.

      • DWBartoo says:

        I suspect, bmaz, you’ve called the score on this ‘contest’ most accurately,
        and ‘twould be most wonderful for a certain ‘favored’ son to grasp the full measure of how much, now, he is disfavored (if not dis-graced).

        A fitting, and most-deserved ‘justice’ …

  12. bell says:

    i don’t see obama visiting arizona as ‘kicking a man when he is down’.. i think it is a bad analogy.. obama has the freedom to go whereever he chooses and going to arizona is probably a good idea… do something out of the box.. that is what is needed more often, instead of always playing it safe..

  13. BuckeyeHamburger says:

    As I recall, Reagan had an appearance in Minnesota, Mondale’s home state, on the last day of the 1984 campaign, right before the election. It was an in-your-face move: Reagan was going for the full sweep, all 50 states. As it turned out, he won every state except Minnesota and D.C., but nevertheless, just being there sent the message that Reagan was going for the shutout, the crushing blow, the absolute wallop. He didn’t get the shutout, but he got the crushing blow and absolute wallop.

    Obama could go to Arizona on the last day of the campaign — he might even win there. Why settle for just winning the election? Why not go for the blow and the wallop?

      • bmaz says:

        You have to win to govern. I desire to quit repeating history; and the philosophy you propound the Democrats and Obama take is exactly the same one that has repeatedly been taken to catastrophic results. If there were rational and decent opponents to do so with on the other side of the aisle, i would be all with you. There are not, and times are too perilous to get sucked in that trap right off the bat again. Win, establish your government and change, right the ship, then make nice. In that order. But the real issue I have is that there are some of the worst malefactors here in the 5th largest city and fourth largest county that will likely be reelected without a last minute push; but they can and will likely be defeated with said push. Plus Obama’s mandate will be significantly stronger with a win in Arizona. If you do not live here, you have no idea of the living civil rights hell we live under with Arpaio and Thomas; If they were plaguing your community and the stakes were this big as to size and effect, I would want to remove them for you.

        ALSO DID I MENTION:

        Word just in from Dr. Bruce Merrill, the local polling legend. New poll to be released tonight has McCain up by two little itty bitty points: McCain 46% Obama 44% and Obama still seen as closing with a full week left and undecideds still expected to break significantly Obama!!!!!

        • lllphd says:

          all good points, bmaz, but you did not address a single one of my substantive reasons for the alternative. i beg you to do so. preferably after you calm down.

          meanwhile, i spent most of my life in the deep south, so i am empathetic about your nightmare. AZ is not the only political hellhole in this country. please keep this in mind as you propose slash and burn tactics for the rest of us.

          and forgive me, but i must take you to task for your nastiness toward leftindc. WTF?? it’s not like he was in here truly trolling as a repug all nasty and breathing fire and destruction. forgive me again, but that does seem to be your role here today.

          finally, i’m not sure i quite got that polling note; link? did you get the numbers right? confused….

        • bmaz says:

          Because I have a very long memory of previous concern trolling by the one known as Leftdcin72 that is why. And i believe I have expressed my opinion quite clearly here, there is nothing more to be gained in repeating the same.

          It is laughable to call trying to actually win a race and benefit down ticket candidates “slash and burn”. It is effectively a dead even race, but you suggest that trying to win it is slash and burn. That is an astonishing statement.

        • lllphd says:

          no, i suggest obama going in ‘for the kill’ to rub mccain’s face in a loss is slash and burn.

          you are sounding increasingly desperate, bmaz; most unlike you. get a grip.

        • lllphd says:

          and no, you were not clear. hence my request.

          and it was not even about being clear. you ignored my points, which you need to address in order for your position to be at all compelling, or even persuasive.

          go ahead; give it a shot. i have no doubt you are up to it.

        • lllphd says:

          oh. and since when do we have to win to govern??

          last i checked, this democracy has a place for the minority, at least in theory. in theory, we each can contributing to governance.

          so don’t be slinging that all or nothing crap my way, brother. it will not fly.

          YOU ARE SOUNDING JUST LIKE A REPUBLICAN!!

          jeepers, never thought i’d be saying that to anyone here, and certainly not you. but, there you are.

      • freepatriot says:

        what does it serve?

        the repuglitards are not going to become some sort of honorable opposition just because you don’t like their tactics unless we CRUSH those repuglitards who use DISHONORABLE tactics

        I personally believe that the repuglitard party must be destroyed before conservatives are allowed to again participate in national government in any meaningful way

        some stains cannot be washed away

        the repuglitard party is a stain we cannot wash away

        at least we should stop havin go to listen to this shit …

        it’s time for the repuglitard party to die

        • lllphd says:

          “the repuglitards are not going to become some sort of honorable opposition just because you don’t like their tactics unless we CRUSH those repuglitards who use DISHONORABLE tactics

          I personally believe that the repuglitard party must be destroyed before conservatives are allowed to again participate in national government in any meaningful way

          some stains cannot be washed away

          the repuglitard party is a stain we cannot wash away

          at least we should stop havin go to listen to this shit …

          it’s time for the repuglitard party to die”

          my holy sweet jeepers, dude.

          please. i beg of you take a long look at what you just wrote there. does it not remind you of ANYTHING???
          substitute anything in there for ‘republitard’, and i mean anything: go ahead, try it. let’s make a list. try liberal. or commie. or arab. or muslim. or hippy or pinko. or spic or gook or nigger or nigger-lover!

          it’s not your enemy or who you hate, dude, it’s the HATE!!

          look at you! look at this! look at us!! what is happening here????

          i fled (actually, i was banished because i dared to dissent from the sort of language that is suddenly appearing here now) from contributing to a blog a while back, and have occasionally checked in to see where it’s gone. oh god, it’s ugly. it’s foul. it’s beyond nasty and mean and hateful and despicable.

          you betcha, slippery slope, that.

          so i ask you again, WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE??? i have felt at home at this blog because everyone is so damn smart and educated and devoted and CIVILIZED!!! we could discuss the details because there was no distraction with the nastiness and venom and vitriol.

          but now it’s rearing its very ugly head and it’s from within, and you have the unmitigated temerity to actually attack leftdc for suggesting a TEMPERED consideration?? is that quality not what seems to be gaining obama so much traction???

          EW, HELP??!! we need a class monitor or something. a grownup, anyways.

  14. Twain says:

    Does anyone know about Obama’s remaining schedule? I think he’s in Fla today with the Big Dog but don’t know anything past that.

  15. henrythefifth says:

    It would be the ultimate gauntlet throw down for Obama to head there. Go to AZ Barack! If only for symbolic purposes!

  16. flounder says:

    I knew how much trouble McCain was in because here in Prescott, the right wing local paper basically instituted a policy of no liberal letters to the editor. Now they usually ran very few of them anyways, but I have submitted a number of them and haven’t had a single one printed, and haven’t seen any latelye, except one arguing against our gay marriage amendment. I believe the only reason the paper ran that one is the letter writer said that the “separation of church and state” was written into the U.S. Constitution. The paper made sure to add an “editor’s note” to the letter to make it clear that the Constitution did not contain these words.

  17. JohnLopresti says:

    I agree a Phoenix rally would be a nice touch. The internet’s communications capapabilities have helped open new areas in this campaign, a trait which began to be visible over the past few elections, as well. Two of the principal postelections plans which figure into the McCain organization strategy, and for the Democratic party’s objectives similarly, involve appointments and census. Recently McCain has made a point of reiterating the far right’s nuclear option philosophy, making it clear his presidency would attempt to clear the bench of centrist and leftward favoring judges.

    Additionally, local newspapers traditionally have published narratives to a captive audience, and even when partly owned by “liberal” interests, continue to toss favors to the deep conservative reactionaries. Consider as an example a local article published last week where I live. Our county registrar of voters tallied 6,000 newly registered Democratic party voters, 1,000 new Republicans, 4,000 new Decline To State. The local paper hid the gross proportions of the Republican failure to attract new membership by issuing the results in percent format. This is classic journalistic cronyism, but the internet makes possible instant clarification, and communication of the real trends to key decisionmakers and planners.

    I think voters are taking their concerns to the ballot box without stating many of their motives, but they know gas has cost a lot, the Iraq war hype was fictionalized, their telephones likely were tapped without warrants, their government institutionalized torture and bailed out of the Geneva conventions, friends’ houses are under pressure of foreclosure, credit is nonexistent to trace. There may be a lot of imponderables in this election, but clearly McCain has only the plum appointees writing his speeches, and Barack Obama works from a different new paradigm of ways to develop compromises to exit the policies which the Republican party, such as it was early in the millenium, fostered and forced through congress, and clamped into place with a wierd barage of “signing statements”.

  18. redX says:

    I do agree that coattails for downticket races are critical. This pattern also applies to the other states as well. If it a few points though a visit would be good.

    Does he have the solid ground game in AZ?

  19. 60thStreet says:

    I totally agree and I wrote the same thing in a diary at Kos yesterday and have a new one to post once the Cronkite-8 poll goes up. Lots of people still have mixed feelings about Obama campaigning in AZ. I think it is a no-brainer. We should treat this as any other battleground and AZ has special significance in many areas if you ask me. A few more are:

    * HUGE demoralizing blow for the McCain campaign in the final week to know they have to defend their own state.

    * If there are GOP Election Day shenanigans in other battlegrounds, we can safely say they didn’t plan them in AZ.

    * McCain is really unprepared to defend Arizona staff and volunteer-wise. All he can really do is run ads there.

    *A 100K +crowd rally would do wonders for AZ candidates and GOTV efforts..

    http://www.dailykos.com/storyo…..253/643526

  20. leftdcin72 says:

    There is an old expression called “piling on”. The last thing we need is for Obama to look cocky in Arizona, with the press emphasizing that he is going there to rub it in McCain’s face. Also, why should Obama try to humiliate McCain by making a losing state closer. Obama beongs in Florida and Ohio these last days.

    • bmaz says:

      Oh look, our old concern troll friend is back for some more nervous, jittery, inane hand wringing. thanks so much once again; don’t let the steel door hit you in the ass bubba.

    • freepatriot says:

      ever seen the movie “The Untouchables” ???

      we know our Sean Connery around here

      if they send one of our guys to the hospital, we send one of their guys to the morgue

      we ain’t playin beanbag here

      our evil overlord says us mindless minions must crush the repuglitards

      so get used to it

      and btw, that WAS the polite version …yer gittin a pass in this thread, for obvious considerations

      to everybody who doesn’t live under a bridge:

      (tears)

    • lllphd says:

      wow, i agree, and it appears we’re in the minority, despite the fact that we are voicing the very words of the dem candidate!

      i apologize for bmaz nasty troll comments; not sure why he is determined to be so nasty, but gosh bmaz, you are sounding way too much like all those folks we really do not like to have around here.

      anyways, also agree leftindc about clinton (see my posts above).

      glad you’re out there!

        • lllphd says:

          i agree, but this nastiness is so uncharacteristic. been there done that already on one blog i once liked, and i sure don’t want to see that happen here.

          by the way, why did you leave dc? nixon?

        • leftdcin72 says:

          Were you around in 72. Do you remember “The National Movement for the Student Vote”. I worked for McGovern and ran the New Jersey campaign along side the Clintons in Texas. Then I left McGovern to do voter registration through “The Student Vote”. I reacted or over reacted to the ego tripping in the McGovern campaign and left dc in 72.

  21. MarieRoget says:

    “And the dead shall rise, they shall rise. All rise, all rise, all rise………………

    RIP my mother, Marie Roget. She had an aneurysm break and is gone now but her faith in progress lives to the generations.

    Natalie Boisvert Williams

  22. cinnamonape says:

    leftindc…Obama is not “piling it on” by making McCain defend Arizona. It would be piling it on by going after States like Oklahoma or Utah.

    In fact, there are extremely good reasons for helping the downticket Democrats in Arizona. There are a number of progressive and moderate Democrats in Arizona that would possibly get elected if Obama increased the turnout and made a great case for voting for them. It would establish a stronger party, long term, in the State…rather than one that worked hard…only to see critical races lost to an established (though vulnerable) party machine.

    Obama has told his supporters to fight to the end and not get complacent. He’s told people that this election is not about him, but about taking their country back. He’s supported Howard Dean’s 50-State Strategy.

    Why pull back from that now?

    Obama is not “fighting dirty” by taking the battle to McCain’s home ground. Politics is like a war with rules (though McCain appears to be willing to break them)…and you fight people where they show vulnerabilities. McCain became complacent about his own home state.

    If we look at Hispanic support for McCain in Arizona…it remains high (although that is “weak support”). This is especially interesting given vastly higher levels of Hispanic support in NM, Colorado, Nevada and Colorado. These Hispanics should be brought into the Democratic Party. They should not be in the party of racial division and immigrant-bashing.

  23. cinnamonape says:

    Here are all the polls over the last month, according to pollster.com

    Pollster Dates N/Pop McCain/Obama/Barr/Nader/Und/Other Margin
    NAU 10/18-27 600 RV 49 41 – – 8 – +8R
    Rasmussen 10/26 500 LV 51 46 – – 2 1 +5R
    Myers/Gr (D) 10/23-4 600 LV 44 40 2 3 3 – +4R
    Zimmerman 10/16-1 408 LV 44 42 2 2 10 – +2R
    Rasmussen 9/29 500 LV 59 38 – – 2 1 +21R

    If we take the last four most recent we would have an average of 4.25 not 6.6. So clearly RCP is including some component of the previous September Rasmussen poll to obtain their number. Even using poll-weights based on sample sizes gets nowhere near that 6.6 (simple to figure…average the two N=600 samples and you’d get a smaller number than 6.6 (i.e. 6))

    Another interesting element…The ras poll shows that Obama has diminished the lead from 21% > 5 % in less than a month. We don’t know when that reduction actually began, though. But that means that, with campaigning and GOTV it could easily be attainable unless it has hit a “ceiling”. The Hispanic voters (weak for McCain) and high undecideds in a couple of the surveys suggest that this may not be the case.

    Then notice that McCain’s biggest leads are in the two surveys that exclude Barr and Nader from the survey. So it’s clear that both Barr and Nader are stripping away support in Arizona and that the race is a lot closer than suggested by Ras and the NAU polls.

    • bmaz says:

      Oh no, the local polling guru, Merrill, has the remaining undecideds breaking Obama significantly. My guess is 2 to 1. I am not saying it will happen that we go Obama, just that there is a very good chance that it could happen. There are a whole lot of things i have been paying attention to for a while here, and I am convinced it is possible and that a huge Obama rally would likely set it off. There is a huge plus to the ground game and motivation already for Obama from what I can see. I think it is a tossup now, which is why I keep bleating for a visit from the candidate.

  24. cinnamonape says:

    “but here is the way i would predict obama would calculate such a thing. there is nothing to be gained by humiliating your adversary when you are winning. this is just a universal rule of civility. the far- and forward-reaching consequences are horrifying. this is precisely why we are so reviled in iraq, for chrissake.”

    But you assume that this election is in the bag. If so, then Obama should pull his final Wednesday night national speech. It would, after all, be “rubbing it in”. It’s clear that Obama doesn’t think this is a “given”.

    I tend to think that one can’t assume anything…especially in this context of a party that has big, big money behind it…and control of the wheels of governance in almost all the critical States. Taking the seat of Shadegg might be reason enough to campaign in Arizona.

    We are not simply trying to win the Presidency…but create a situation where the President can govern with the necessary flexibility. Having enough Senate and House seats enables him to select from a range of policies. He need not compromise with Blue Dog Democrats or Lieberman or Mitch McConnell. The Republicans can’t stymie his legislation.

    As well, once people vote Democratic they are less averse to doing so a second time. They truly become free of the shackles that constrained them. They obtain a sense of the possible. There are lots of States that Obama can have this influence within. Arizona, Georgia, North Carolina, Virginia, Indiana, Missouri, etc. IMO his only criterion should be what will help bring him the most secure win in terms of electoral votes and Congressional support. John McCain’s feelings should not be part of the calculus.

    John McCain’s behavior toward Obama at the debates, in his campaign and toward groups like ACORN, and indeed towards the voters whom he has made efforts to disenfranchise and deceive, might even warrant a public humiliation.

    But the only consideration that I feel that Obama must make here is what it means to his ability to win, and govern.

    • lllphd says:

      i must respectfully disagree, and i suspect obama would, as well, that his ONLY considerations are to win and govern. i just don’t think he makes his decisions that way, and for that i am most glad; it is a HUGE reason i am voting for him, dammit!

      there are truly more important things than winning! to quote ew, jeebus! are we really having this conversation here? in this place? about this?? are we really talking about how we have to own the government just to govern? i know i know, the repugs will make it impossible without those overwhelming mandate numbers, but they will also make asses of themselves, and i have this feeling obama will be skilled at out-maneuvering them. the damn party is so damn splintered, they don’t know which end is up anymore. there is NO leadership, none. and if obama has demonstrated nothing else it has been that he has this uncanny jiu jitsu way of just allowing his opponent’s weaknesses take them down.

      and then you offer a hand and pat them on the back and say let’s get to work.

      as for the criminals, i don’t think obama has in mind to ignore what has happened. but as i said above, i do believe he has a very strong sense of how powerfully important it is to establish a unified and educated foundation first. he has to really woo this country, to win them over, once the fighting is over and he has to govern.

      because governing is not just about having a mandate and winning all the states. it’s not about owning all the chips. it’s knowing when to hold ‘em and when to fold ‘em, when to walk and when to run. you know the riff, sappy, but it’s so true.

      this man seems to really live by that kind of poker skill, an almost zen ability to sense when he does not need to push.

      that is a far far greater show of strength than anything you folks are proposing here.

      again, with all due respect, you guys are sounding like the desperate repugs we know and loathe. i understand that the situation in AZ may well be desperate, but it could not be any more desperate than LA or GA or TN, for cryin’ out loud. could we perhaps try on a bit of perspective and scope here?

      again, can i just suggest that you consider the specific potential consequences of an obama visit to AZ that i list above. frankly, i don’t like any of them except for the possibility that two criminals might not get re-elected. but is that enough to risk embarrassment if obama does not carry AZ? he will be resented for trying to rub mccain’s face in it, and that is just unseemly, a reagan move that i just do not see obama making. another reason why i admire the guy. he does not want to reduce himself to that level.

      thank god. thank god for that. can we not be satisfied with winning with honor and integrity? can we not be satisfied with even losing with honor and integrity?? isn’t that something this country is supposed to be about????

  25. cinnamonape says:

    Here is some more info regarding the ASU/Cronkite Poll (it was embargoed until 7PM) but has been leaked.

    Cronkite/Eight Poll AZ

    M: 46
    O: 44

    McCain Could Lose Arizona

    A new Cronkite/Eight Poll in Arizona shows Sen. John McCain leads Sen. Barack Obama by just two points, 46% to 44%.

    Said poll director Bruce Merrill: “Obama has been closing the gap by attracting independents and women to his campaign. McCain still does well among conservative Democrats and evangelicals. However, a week is a long time in a political campaign and anything can happen. Who wins will be determined by which candidate gets their supporters out to the polls on Election Day.”

    So the last five polls are now
    ASU/Cronkite +2R
    NAU +8R
    Rasmussen +5R
    Myers/Gr (D) +4R
    Zimmerman +2R

    So that’s a 4.2 lead for McCain. But with the three polls that include third-party options 2.66% well within the MOE. All the polls trending towards Obama. Meanwhile it seems that several States are now falling outside of the light blue to being comfortably Blue.

    Obama has to start thinking about whether he wants to concentrate on Missouri, Georgia, North Carolina Indiana and Arizona pretty soon. All of these are possibilities and may be worth a final blitz visit. Certainly he should start considering sending prominent surrogates there soon.

  26. cinnamonape says:

    Well, llphd…you see a different Obama than I do. I see a wily Muhammed Ali (his pic is on Obama’s wall BTW) who is willing to use rope-a-dope to tire his opponent for the knockout…not win on points. I remember the Obama that went up to McCain on the Senate floor and chastised him. You must recall that Obama is the guy that refused to give up his position running for State Senator after the former holder of that position wanted him to drop out so she could run again for it. He told her that once he committed to a task he finished the job.

    And I don’t see the Republicans in the South having any sympathy for Obama because he backs off Arizona. They will see it as a sign of weakness, a flaw in his character. They will consider it humiliating enough that he’s campaigning in Georgia and North Carolina. That he visited Selma, Mississippi. That he went to Missouri and Omaha, Nebraska. That he’s even deigning to compete in Montana. And would you consider it just as offensive if he sent either Clinton, or Biden, or Michelle Obama there to support the campaign?

    I’d feel sad if you decided to vote for McCain-Palin if Obama decided to hold a rally in Phoenix or Tucson, but if that’s your criteria for supporting him rather than his policy positions…and that you’d give your vote to the far nastier campaigners in this race…well then so be it. I think Obama will be weighing what it means to a far greater constituency in Arizona (or Georgia, North Carolina, Florida, etc.).

  27. cinnamonape says:

    Why would sending in the Clintons be less humiliating? It’s still campaigning against McCain in his home state…and will perhaps “humiliate him” by making him lose it. Isn’t the humilation “losing his home state”?

    Would pouring a lot of ad money into the state…perhaps his Spanish language ad…too much?

    Do you think that Obama should intentionally lose Arizona?

    I really don’t see your point that “appearing” in Arizona will be the ultimate humiliation and prevent Obama from reaching out to McCain after the election? Do you think that McCain is so immature that he can’t separate a political defeat from his role as Senator? Doesn’t a good politician look at the mood in his State and try to adapt in order to serve ones constituency? Why would McCain want to screw over his constituents?

  28. cinnamonape says:

    I think that the Republicans are doing plenty well destroying their own party, BTW. Obama doesn’t have to do very much more than offer a hand out to those like Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins (if she survives the Blue Tsunami), and Obama’s old buddy Dick Lugar. I’m wondering if one or more of these folks will go the way of Jim Jeffords…inasmuch as some of the Republicans appear to be already slating Palin as their 2012 nominee. That to me would signal the end of the party, just as the Whigs dissolved into the Know-Nothings, Free State and Republican Party in the 1850’s.

Comments are closed.