Kevin Drum: This election proves that the blogosphere has no influence
posted at 2:10 pm on May 6, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Not at the national level, anyway. This has always been a hobbyhorse of mine but it’s one thing for a righty blogger to admit it and quite another for a lefty, with the vaunted netroots fundraising machine to tout, to do so. Our favorite liberal has always insisted that the power of left-wing blogs was overstated and that that would become clearer the closer we got to the election. KP 1, AP 0:
[T]he real lesson of the 2008 primaries is to raise some serious doubts about the power of the blogosphere in particular and the netroots more generally. On the Republican side, I’d venture that John McCain was the least favorite of the major candidates by a pretty fair margin. But he won anyway. On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton was the least favorite of the majors but she’s one of the last two standing. And although Barack Obama is a netroots darling now, it’s worth remembering that his initial foray on Daily Kos didn’t endear him to the blogosphere in the beginning. His message of bipartisan reconciliation was about the farthest thing imaginable from the “fighting Dem” spirit of the blogosphere and he took plenty of hits for it. He’s only popular now by default: virtually the entire netroots loathes Hillary Clinton, which means Obama is the only choice they have left.
If the respective left and right blogospheres had any real say in things, would we be looking at a McCain vs. Obama contest in November? Or McCain vs. Hillary? We would not. It would be Giuliani vs. Edwards, or maybe Romney vs. Dodd. [Actually, it'd be Fred Thompson, but point taken. -- ed.] The blogosphere is good at raising modest sums of money, and it likewise plays a modest role at the congressional level, but its influence on the national stage appears to be pretty close to nil.
For further grudging admissions in this vein, see Chris Bowers at Open Left. The counterargument I always get when the subject of blog impotence comes up is the amnesty debacle last summer, but who really torpedoed that — blogs, or conservative talk radio? Their audience is hundreds of times the size of ours. It may be true that their most devoted listeners substantially overlap with blog readership, if you assume that some people want/need a daily political fix and can’t get enough from Rush et al., but then the question simply becomes: Would those same people have been as animated in objecting to the immigration bill if they had to rely “only” on Limbaugh, Hannity, Ingraham and so forth to get them fired up? I’m guessing: yes.
The more interesting question is what the election says about talk radio’s power, not ours. Medved had some interesting theories about that as Captain Amnesty was locking up the nomination. We’ll see how Operation Chaos does in Indiana in a few hours.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Blogs are information warehouses not influence peddlers.
Blogs can counter other media but they arent organizations just simply places to go to get media that you cant get elsewhere.
Moveon has money to make it run but there is no conservative alternative to that. Something I myself am considering working on. Too often politicans pander to individuals and its hard to sell candidates to thousands of different people. The Idea to have influence is to organize and turn words into action.
Perhaps the best way to reform the republican party is a grassroots organization that sets up goals that can be agreed upon rather than letting others pick the politicans and we are forced to back them after the fact.
William Amos on May 6, 2008 at 2:15 PM
I think he misses a point…
and one reason I read blogs.
They are now DRIVING some news stories. There is often a 48 hour lag between when things go balistic on blogs, and the MSM picks them up.
Its an information source that the MSM is starting to use… because its MUCH easier to find information with thousands of people looking, than with one looking…
Romeo13 on May 6, 2008 at 2:16 PM
I think you’re underestimating a key variable. If you read blogs all day as I do, you can’t help but hear the “gatekeeper” and the “agenda setting” effects on other media, from Brit Hume’s “Grapevine” each night, to Rush Limbaugh’s major topic areas each day.
rivlax on May 6, 2008 at 2:17 PM
Even with all the buzz around mobilizing the youth vote, the older crowd still turns out more. Most of them can’t even define “blog”, let alone read them.
The most important factor is the negative drumbeat from NBC, CBS. ABC, MSNBC, CCN, etc.
Grafted on May 6, 2008 at 2:19 PM
“On the Republican side, I’d venture that John McCain was the least favorite of the major candidates by a pretty fair margin.” Kossack
But wait a minute! The VERY REASON McCain is in the position he is now in is due to the criticism of the other candidates on the blogosphere…then eventually FOX and the MSM.
Romney’s candidacy was derailed by the blogosphere (Thank God!).
So was every other candidacy. Including Governor Huckabee’s…his record completely distorted by the righty-blogosphere.
Like it or not, AP, the “boss” shares the responsibility for the GOP’s woes concerning the nomination.
Al-Ozarka on May 6, 2008 at 2:19 PM
What’s a “blogosphere,” and where can I get one?
Akzed on May 6, 2008 at 2:19 PM
A blogosphere is in the same place on the interwebs where the email is?
Chuck Schick on May 6, 2008 at 2:21 PM
I agree with you.
Actually I agree with you quite often. GMTA.
upinak on May 6, 2008 at 2:23 PM
Yeah, they always steal my stuff! They should start paying me for all the points and news they’ve taken from me! (/sarc)
ThackerAgency on May 6, 2008 at 2:25 PM
If the blogs have no influence why do the lefties want to shut them down with the Fairness Doctrine? Could it be that the leftist blogs have less influence than the rightist blogs, just like leftist radio shows perish while Rush Limbaugh continues to flourish?
I wouldn’t discount us so quickly.
Maxx on May 6, 2008 at 2:26 PM
Akzed said
“What’s a “blogosphere,” and where can I get one?”
Al Gore handed them out when he invented the Internet. Since you missed it you can still get one by buying some carbon offset credits.
BobK on May 6, 2008 at 2:26 PM
Yeah, fair point. There is a bit of influence there, but obviously the lefty blogs have much more in that regard than we do. We can occasionally push stuff onto Fox and into talk radio, but Rush was doing just fine by himself before the ’sphere came along.
Please. Spare me your whining. So help me god, every time a candidate dropped out, I had to put up with some supporter of theirs accusing me of having almost singlehandedly destroyed them on this puny site that’s read by maybe 80,000 people a day. You think Rush Limbaugh was a big Huckabee supporter before the blogosphere opened his eyes? Come on.
Allahpundit on May 6, 2008 at 2:27 PM
Well, blogs have made it much easier for me to be aware of what the heck is going on in the world, and that’s enough for me.
Bob's Kid on May 6, 2008 at 2:27 PM
Blogs are secondary to the Fairness Doctrine. They’re after talk radio.
Allahpundit on May 6, 2008 at 2:28 PM
I think the blogs have some input, but not as much as they had hoped. I think one reason is that ordinary people vote, but they have better things to do than hang out on blogs all day. I am the only person I know who actually reads political blogs. Most folks do well to watch the news everyday.
Terrye on May 6, 2008 at 2:28 PM
The problem is with “Republicans” who have come to accept the premise that the State is the solution to this country’s problems. More and more “Republicans” look to the State for the answer. This has been the result of the generational, Socialist indoctrination of ALL childern – in our public schools. The more recent “Republican” candidates don’t represent Conservative views for a reason. They are being chosen by “Republicans” who aren’t Conservatives.
Socialism is winning the war. And, eventually, it will destroy our country.
Personally, I don’t listen to Limbaugh, Hannity or Ingraham. I was a Conservative long before they hit the radio.
I come to HotAir to vent – it’s therapeutic. I don’t come here with the hope that this country will become truly Conservative. That hope is lost.
OhEssYouCowboys on May 6, 2008 at 2:29 PM
Blogsphere has brought in a lot of cash to the Obama campaign
bnelson44 on May 6, 2008 at 2:29 PM
And I think the same is true with a lot of the talk radio too. I was asking people if they had heard of Operation Chaos and no one had. Most people think of all that stuff and tedious, depressing and negative.
Terrye on May 6, 2008 at 2:30 PM
“You think Rush Limbaugh was a big Huckabee supporter before the blogosphere opened his eyes? Come on.” AP
So…you think Rush’s criticisms were not influenced by what he read on the blogosphere? Come on!
You think that FoxNews and other outlets were not influenced by the blogs? Come on!
Al-Ozarka on May 6, 2008 at 2:32 PM
We are better off with blogs not being too influential. Bloggers tend to be the most politically informed–which actually is a problem. Various academic studies have found that the most informed individuals tend towards the extremes, and so without the moderation of the ignorant we’d veer widely from social con fascism to socialism and back. I have no desire to experience government like that.
Of course, I have my Aristotelian biases towards moderation.
thuja on May 6, 2008 at 2:32 PM
And BTW…”shares responsibility” is not “singlehandedly”.
Al-Ozarka on May 6, 2008 at 2:33 PM
Here, here! I second that. The GOP must have a platform upon which the candidates run on and we work together.
maverick muse on May 6, 2008 at 2:33 PM
If you get a good blog with a good blogger, and depending on the type of blog …. you can educate some people. I know I have on my blog… but it has to be a two way street.
upinak on May 6, 2008 at 2:34 PM
OhEss:
I just finished a really good book entitled North River by Pete Hamill. The year was 1934 and the place New York City. The main character was a poor doctor who had lost partial use of an arm in WW1. The writer was actually born in that year in NYC, one of seven children of Irish immigrants. The book is really good at creating a sense of time and place. I think we forget today how many people were hurt by the Depression and how many people really thought that socialism might be the answer. Think of Orwell. But the book is not so much political as it is a story about a family. If you like a good story it is worth the read.
I think that today people are more hesitant about believing in government created solutions than they were then.They were more desperate then and they had not had the experience of years of failed attempts.
Terrye on May 6, 2008 at 2:36 PM
I surely love the picture of the SMakTard that is KOs….
I bet he looks just like that when he’s asleep….
HEH!!!
BigWyo on May 6, 2008 at 2:37 PM
For the blogs to matter they have to actually do something besides regurgitation. We need to setup spontaneous blog networks who are actually focused on single issues for short term workable goals.
ninjapirate on May 6, 2008 at 2:37 PM
I reckon that once in quiet, serene privacy of the booth, each voter marks the ballot according to their own perceived best interests. Regardless of influences from the internet, the media, friends/family/neighbors, or beams from outer space, the American people are still free and independent thinkers.
RushBaby on May 6, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Yet you forget it is the Depression Era that remember that and not the Baby Boomers who are more the voting mass right now.
upinak on May 6, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Well, see, that’s one of the problems. I don’t blog with any “goal” in mind. I do it to entertain and inform when I can. Advocacy doesn’t really interest me.
Allahpundit on May 6, 2008 at 2:39 PM
Romeo 13 makes some excellent points. He’s right, the Blogs are about 48 hours ahead of typical mainstream media stories.
I’ll see something here at HotAir.com and then two days later it will be a headliner on the MSM, even at our fav Fox.
On my own blog, Libertarian Republican, I’ve seen this phenomena. We publish an article on an interest to the libertarian movement, and 48 hours later Fox, CNN or someone else picks it up. Ironically, CNN – not my favorite News Channel – has given us credit no less than 4 times for breaking a story. Others have not.
So, yes, the Political Blogosphere has influence in other, somewhat immeasurable ways.
ericdondero on May 6, 2008 at 2:40 PM
I use the StumbleUpon system to surf the internet when I’m bored. The lefty political sites outnumber the right by a large margin. I don’t know if it’s because they all spout the same stupid talking points or what but seems to me they that they get a large part of their info off the net.
GoodBoy on May 6, 2008 at 2:40 PM
I blame you for Fred allah because he was too lazy to make you stand up for him and elect him all by yourself
I dont blame anyone for Huck. I thank the voters that is over.
William Amos on May 6, 2008 at 2:41 PM
Allahpundit on May 6, 2008 at 2:39 PM
Allah you are correct. Most bloggers do their own “interests” and people with those or simular interests read them and possibly comment.
upinak on May 6, 2008 at 2:41 PM
Although that is true, Obama’s hugest funds come from international sources, as do Hillary’s, laundered through various entities including non-profit organizations and blogs. Create enough blogs, and you have a lot of places to divide huge contributions from the Chinese government (Hillary) or Muslims in sync with al Quaeda or the FARC of Colombia (Obama), Obama’s links were verified by INTERPOL.
maverick muse on May 6, 2008 at 2:42 PM
And the integrity to kick people out of the party that violate the platform!
dominigan on May 6, 2008 at 2:42 PM
I agree. The implication of this approach is shifting alliances as the issues change. Shifting alliances are more politically healthy than the “left” and the “right” teams.
thuja on May 6, 2008 at 2:46 PM
This can’t be quite right. You do wish to advance the political interests of groups that are more to the right than to the left. For instance, I can’t see you writing to help Obama win the presidency simply to entertain us.
thuja on May 6, 2008 at 2:50 PM
And I thought I was the only one on Hot Air who thought that…
Back in February I asked Michelle to do 1-on-1 interviews with both McCain and Huckabee. I know that McCain has refused to do so, but I never heard about Huckabee. Did Michelle try to do such an interview with Huck? If not, I’d still encourage her to do so. Go ahead and ask him the tough questions. Many people do not really understand who Huckabee is and how good a President he will make.
On the amnesty issue, how many Presidential candidates agreed to all of the points Senator Sessions proposed?
On judicial nominees, how many Presidential candidates (prior to McCain’s speech today) committed to appointing judges/justices with proven track records in the mold of Roberts, Alito, Scalia, and Thomas?
On the dignity of human life, how many Presidential candidates support the Human Life amendment?
How many Presidential candidates openly support Israel?
How many Presidential candidates support energy Independence?
How many Presidential candidates support food Independence?
How many Presidential candidates support abolishing the IRS and implementing the Fair Tax?
How many Presidential candidates strongly support second amendment rights?
How many Presidential candidates strongly support the proper interpretation of first amendment rights?
Red Pill on May 6, 2008 at 2:51 PM
It is irresponsible to deny responsibility for his rumor mongering, as Allahpundit (and Michelle Malkin, as wonderful as they may be) DID instigate derogatory rumors against Fred Thompson, and promoted and redistributed the wholecloth rumors against Fred made up by their friends as well, Jonathan Martin @ Politico and Carl Cameron as well. When it’s credit he wants, it is credit he claims. But when he wants to pass the buck, he claims no influence. And to date, he has yet to apologize for any wrong doing since no one died, only character assassination.
maverick muse on May 6, 2008 at 2:52 PM
Strange thing for an atheist to say.
Red Pill on May 6, 2008 at 2:52 PM
dominigan on May 6, 2008 at 2:42 PM
at least the integrity to NEITHER NOMINATE NOR VOTE FOR such
maverick muse on May 6, 2008 at 2:53 PM
Its fair game to be critical of any person running for office and Im a big fred supporter and I never saw any anti Fred bias here.
Allah and Michelle and other here are tough on ALL politicans because you have to hold their feet to the fire to get honest answers.
Again this blog and others dont reach millions of people most people get their political info from a varity of sources.
Ultimately politicans are to blame for the failure of thier campaings not anything or anyone else.
William Amos on May 6, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Someone has already beat you to it. Look at how much grassroots activity has been going on here and here.
Red Pill on May 6, 2008 at 2:55 PM
Al-Ozarka and Red Pill, you are pills.
AP (Allah) 1 million!!! for the entertainment, and the news, in an interesting and witty way. Anyone who doesn’t like it in this parlor, is still free to move to another.
FOX…
CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC
I agree with Mr. Drum’s concluding paragraph.
Entelechy on May 6, 2008 at 2:57 PM
If you steer this thread off-topic, Red Pill, I’m going to ban you straightaway. I’ve warned you umpteen times before. No more warnings.
Really? When do I claim credit for anything? The only credit-seeking I can think of is when I make obvious predictions and then jokingly take credit for them when they come true.
Allahpundit on May 6, 2008 at 2:58 PM
I think that the stupidest thing about all this is the notion that any concept of ‘proof’ can be meaningfully proposed vis-a-vis the blogosphere. It’s just rhetorical blather.
There’s no direct mechanism by which the blogosphere can alter the political process. All it can do is potentially influence individual readers.
I would hazard a guess that the number of people that are hardcore blogosphere denizens is a politically insignificant minority. However, more mainstream media folks are becoming part of that minority, and are paying attention. Somebody earlier noted a time lag – I have noticed this also (24 to 48 hours). That is a significant effect, especially if the coverage being given illuminates controversy (a la Rathergate).
And these little, yet significant effects, may well add up to greater public influence than we can credibly measure.
LimeyGeek on May 6, 2008 at 2:58 PM
yu misunderstood what I was advocating. I wanted to put the issues before the candidate not the other way around. The idea is to push a number of conservative ideas and unite behind them THEN get the candidates to sign onto it not have some candidate and try and wrap the issues around them.
Im not advocating a pro politican stance rather a pro conservative one.
William Amos on May 6, 2008 at 3:00 PM
Insincerity suits you well enough. But don’t forget, you certainly advocated FOR MITT ROMNEY, POTUS. It amounts to sour grapes now to say that you did not. We got over it without your excuses or denials. You needn’t really pursue such unless for your own entertainment or as your well-being requires. Responsibility never has been your strong suit. But a malicious hit and drive attitude is something to beware within one’s motivation.
maverick muse on May 6, 2008 at 3:02 PM
This is why it s/b KP 1, and AP 1, because I don’t recall you taking/giving credit for/to blogs. It was always us who came back with crediting you for helping Rather out.
Entelechy on May 6, 2008 at 3:03 PM
Indeed. Besides, Huckabee is a conservative fraud.
Entelechy on May 6, 2008 at 3:05 PM
What on earth are you talking about? Are you actually accusing me of having been in the tank for Romney? Except for Fred, no one’s supporters have given me more grief for being tough on their guy.
Allahpundit on May 6, 2008 at 3:07 PM
And here i thought Allah was pro robot and pro beta Male.
This whole thread gets a DUDE rating.
William Amos on May 6, 2008 at 3:10 PM
Thank you for your input, and for your book recommendation. I appreciate them both.
Here is how I see things:
The Socialist movement of the 60s targeted the family. Eliminate God from the public forum, and divorce, adultery, homosexuality and abortion become irrelevant. Nothing is sacred. Not the marriage. Not the children. Not the family.
Lenin said: Destroy the family, and the society will collapse.
The Socialists followed this doctrine. They knew that eliminating God would precede the destruction of the family. Destroy the family and the children will become wards of the State. And, of course, wards of the State need the State.
The Socialist control of our public schools has indoctrinated millions of children. Millions of children come from destroyed families. Millions of children have no parental guidance. Millions of children are taught that God is irrelevant, that He doesn’t exist and that only the State is the answer.
Those millions believe in the State. Those millions have been taught to despise America. Those millions have become voters. And their children will be further indoctrinated; not only by the public schools, but by their parent(s), too.
OhEssYouCowboys on May 6, 2008 at 3:10 PM
maverick muse on May 6, 2008 at 3:02 PM
AP, in his heart (and so help me, I’m not claiming to know it) might, just might have been for Giuliani, before he blew it royal with the “Florida thing”, a strategic blunder of great proportions. No one but Giuliani spent more millions to get one single delegate, in all of history.
Other than that most were/are mad at AP, no matter who their candidate was. That means he did his job.
I like your comments generally and argue here just on the ‘AP for Romney’ topic.
Entelechy on May 6, 2008 at 3:11 PM
upinak:
I am a baby boomer. My point is that back in the Depression people openly called themselves socialists. It was a different time. Back then people were fighting for things that we just take for granted today. However, I think that more people are skeptical about the ability of government to solve problems today than they were then.
Terrye on May 6, 2008 at 3:12 PM
“I never saw any anti Fred bias here.”
Following spiteful charicatures, beyond the false report(s) announcing Fred’s end “tomorrow”, character assassination completed Fred’s death by a thousand cuts. Allahpundit participated, having supported what Carl Cameron wrote, that Fred Thompson had only run for POTUS in hopes of getting the VP slot, and that everyone who was anyone in Washington DC knew all about it before Thompson declared his candidacy. My own brochure from Fred Thompson during his initial investigation into the political scene refuted Carl Cameron’s lie.
maverick muse on May 6, 2008 at 3:18 PM
100% on topic…
The influence of HotAir goes well beyond those who read it…it goes on to those who are influenced by those who read it.
Keep in mind that you are read by people who influence hundreds of thousands of others. We’ve seen evidence that staffers at the New York Times read HotAir. We’ve seen evidence that Rush Limbaugh reads HotAir. Sure Rush was around long before HotAir, but count how many times Rush says the word “blogosphere” in a week now. You definitely have influence on the raw material he collects for his show. And if your material influences him, he then goes on to influence hundreds of thousands of other people.
Red Pill on May 6, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Terrye, there’s socialism, and then there’s socialism. It is a dirty word and not even the lefties don’t want to openly be associated with it. But they want to practice a form of it, without being allied with its masters of yesteryear.
Today, they wish to have one like in Europe, part Capitalism, part socialism. The problem is that there is no threshhold and soon enough we’re in the Venezuela type, then the Cuba one, then the Myanmar/Burma one.
Our forces are losing the battle and we must be very diligent. An Obama presidency would accellerate the process like no other. He’s a Marxist and his wife is an anarchist. Hillary is just a European type socialist. McCain is a few rungs above Hillary. None are Capitalists. It’s a perilous time for our country, and the world. Not too far into the future the world will miss the U.S. very much.
Entelechy on May 6, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Entelechy on May 6, 2008 at 3:11 PM
I hold no grudge with AP though I will hold him responsible for his own words, just as we are all responsible for our words.
maverick muse on May 6, 2008 at 3:23 PM
ohyess:
I understand your point, however, most Americans would not see socialism as you do. In other words, back in the 30’s unions really did serve a purpose of helping people through hard times. However, it seems that today they have done their job too well and have become all about perpetuating their own influence…because after all we do not need unions anymore to get fire escapes in buldings or overtime or sick leave. These things are the law.
Back in the Depression, there was virtually no help for the poor. My mother and her parents lost a farm in Oklahoma and went to California to work the camps. They were Okies. It was that or starve. It was because of the Depression that we have certain safeguards that are supposed to stop a complete meltdown of our financial system.
Today when people think about programs like social security, they do not consider them to be socialism. They are just a safety net. So while there are definitely more liberals in the school system than I would like to see…I doubt if many of them think of themselves as socialists. Do you see what I mean?
Terrye on May 6, 2008 at 3:24 PM
Self-correction
Entelechy on May 6, 2008 at 3:24 PM
If anything this site was more Pro Tancredo than anything else (Even though Allah did take shots at him) And that was due to his Immigration stance than his candidacy.
I wish McCain wasnt our nominee either but other than my one vote I had little say. And why I even made that first post because Im tired of my one vote having little meaning.
Goldwater created a movement that lead to Ronald Reagan. We need the movement more than another Ronald Reagan right now.
William Amos on May 6, 2008 at 3:26 PM
so, we’ll end up with McCain, who the base of the Republican Party didn’t want. And BO, who the base…oh wait, I guess the small nutroot base did want him, but the majority of the Democrats didn’t want.
I think this year should serve as a lesson. Maybe we have a pre-primary, and it’s like the NCAA tourney bracket. can start off with 6 or more candidates, down to 4, then down to 2, and revote each time. Yeah, expensive, but it would mete out the whack jobs.
kirkill on May 6, 2008 at 3:28 PM
It’s amazing that we are still battling Karl Marx’s failed ideas today. It should only take one honest comparison of West Germany vs. East Germany twenty years ago, or South Korea vs. North Korea today, to see that the long-term effects of Capitalism are vastly superior to the long-term effects of Marxism/Socialism/Communism. Split any country, let it go for decades as part Captialist and part Communist, and the Capitalist side will result in a much better outcome for every man, woman, and child.
Yet people like William Ayers and his wife Dohrn teach at universities and corrupt the minds of our youth…
Red Pill on May 6, 2008 at 3:31 PM
He steers every thread off-topic:
McCain declines Secret Service protection? Huckabee would’ve protected the Secret Service.
Jindal for VP? Huckabee would make a better VP.
Arianna says McCain didn’t vote Bush in 2000? Huckabee voted Bush in 2000.
The Dark Knight? Huckabee should’ve gotten the part over Ledger.
Transvestite vampires terrorizing New York City? Let me tell you who looks really good in a dress: Mike Huckabee.
misterpeasea on May 6, 2008 at 3:35 PM
Entelechy:
I don’t think most people want to see a laissez faire government anymore than they want communism. I think that most people today think these things are flip sides to the same coin.
We live in a time when people voluntarily move to housing additions where there are rules about what color your mail box can be.
Terrye on May 6, 2008 at 3:36 PM
LO F’n L
RushBaby on May 6, 2008 at 3:41 PM
Actually, Allah is pro-beta male and pro-SEX-with-robots.
Which, I’m assuming, is probably viewed as an anti-robot position. At least by the robots.
Jack M. on May 6, 2008 at 3:41 PM
Hate to say it, but RedPill’s answers to those questions would have been right on topic.
Sorry, I’m getting off topic…
kirkill on May 6, 2008 at 3:44 PM
Terrye, I agree.
Red Pill on May 6, 2008 at 3:31 PM
See Terrye on May 6, 2008 at 3:36 PM
Proof – if the Germans in the South, the conservatives, wouldn’t be so passionate, Germany would be Schroeder country still. He was from Hannover. Most all in the former DDR, and Northern Germany, vote socialist. It’s a miracle and an irony that Mrs. Merkel made it, though barely (and bare sometimes :)
misterpeasea on May 6, 2008 at 3:35 PM
You da man! Thanks for the hearty laugh.
Entelechy on May 6, 2008 at 3:46 PM
Terrye, it’s very easy to digress into the more dangerous zones, though. This is why we should fight hard to keep the brakes on. The masses, unfortunately, are Pauls, or sheeple, as fogw, puts it. It’s very sad that we let schools and professors form our kids, while being out working/shopping, or pursuing whatever…The consequences will be dire.
Entelechy on May 6, 2008 at 3:51 PM
Ok, even I can chuckle at your comment. But I didn’t say a single one of those things. If you wanted to portray what I’ve actually said, you could have done a better job with real quotes/links, rather than parody.
Anyway, the topic of this thread is:
So, talking about the candidates in this election, and how the posters and commenters at HotAir have discussed those candidates (whether or not in an attempt to influence an election), is very much on topic.
Red Pill on May 6, 2008 at 3:51 PM
Just noting something. My Grandmother would have never said she was a Socialist. She would slap you before saying that. The only people who said that were those whom came over after WWI. My Mother on the other hand has always been taken care of.. she doesn’t know what it is like to be on her own. Unlike I, who has never really relied on anyone but myself. Times change. Those who understand are those who work hard. Those who don’t have never had to do anything for themselves. I think it is more the BB’s then the others who are shooting for a more “Socialist” idea, even if it is Taboo or not. And those BB’s are showing the mid 20’s to the teeenagers of now how and what it is like to be taken care of BY the Government.
If you don’t agree with me, that is fine. But it is something I have noticed and not many tell me I am wrong.
upinak on May 6, 2008 at 3:51 PM
I actually spit my soda out. LOL! Thanks!
upinak on May 6, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Red Pill, but parody is so much more effective. You deserved it 100%. The good thing is that you could laugh at yourself, always a plus.
Entelechy on May 6, 2008 at 3:54 PM
upinak, you’re hardly ever wrong :)
Entelechy on May 6, 2008 at 3:55 PM
Well, if we want more influence, we could always rename Hot Air. Like change it to Hot Babes or Hot Rods.
Connie on May 6, 2008 at 3:57 PM
And speaking of HotAir’s influence, wasn’t it April Orit who said she had originally favored Huckabee until people here on HotAir beat her into voting for Fred?
Red Pill on May 6, 2008 at 3:57 PM
LOL. That would certainly generate more traffic.
Red Pill on May 6, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Yup. Just radio. Between 12 & 3 EST.
Spanglemaker on May 6, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Entelechy,
True.
True.
Thanks.
Red Pill on May 6, 2008 at 4:07 PM
Rush may have the lead now, but look how much HotAir has grown in traffic in the last two years. It’s like any other “S-curve”…the “blogosphere” will overtake talk radio in the not-too-distant future…maybe by the 2012 election.
Red Pill on May 6, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Red Pill, there’s hope for you yet. Your reputation got a little shine today. :)
RushBaby on May 6, 2008 at 4:19 PM
William and Entelchy,
Yes, the conservative movement needs to be spoken aloud, not become a closed book collecting dust on a corner shelf. The best of conservatism needs publicity because in fact it was often the REPUBLICAN PARTY that inacted laws for the social improvements that “socialism” bought loyalty for promoting. Social Progressives took credit when it was due the Republican Party, and in turn give credit or blame to the Republican Party for progressive’s own flaws. They suffer a weird identity crisis, blaming conservatives for everything negative that resulted from progressivism. A conservative must be willing to put the offender’s words right back in the offender’s mouth, applying to the one who spoke BEFORE applying to any other target.
Reference Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism that succinctly traces our Western world’s history since Bismark and how America and Europe came to the point where we are today, proving the veracity of conservatism and encouraging conservatives to become aware of our own strengths and our own integrity as a movement. Goldberg concludes that it is time for conservatives to draw the line. He doesn’t mention the Alamo, but as a Texan and descendent of Texicans, naturally the herosim of the Alamo essentially motivates our requirement NOW to draw the line INTELLIGENTLY to be effective, and as a group to be effective. It’s a great book, y’all.
As pointed out at HotAir, socialism bought into our capitalist system in order to bleed it dry with an infinite growth pattern of bureaucracy and programs. LBJ’s programs have yet to solve or improve the initial problems that were addressed, but in fact have created the worst scenario for poor families, requiring no work and no father at home for gov’t aid. The socialist agenda’s antidote is conservatism, not more socialism to infinity and beyond.
Conservatism does not need to BE Progressive, as that only corrupts whatever virtue remains. (Romney has MANY fine qualities. But for popularity, he promoted more statism –govt.as industry for employment in economically depressed areas– that would further defeat conservatism. So long as Romney were running the show, perhaps things would be great. But as soon as a true fascist took the reigns, Romney would have provided the means for our enslavement to big brother.) Without conservatism, there would be no antidote for the fascism that smiles benevolently as our children are coerced into indoctrination in order to make a living with a college degree, even with a high school degree. Our littlest children can not even play ball games at recess, nor monkey bars, only shuffle around the “play” ground and talk. They MUST believe Al Gore’s lack of science, or they will be persecuted by teachers and peers. Parents will lose children to the state that knows best how to rear them unless conservatism takes a stand to limit the arm of big brother (CPS).
Do not allow conservatism to be ignorantly dismissed by progressives as a stale vapor when actually it is the essence that will balance our sickening overtly overbearing socialist government that won’t even protect our borders. This Progressive government has created the situation wherein elected officials deny conservative citizens their voice, having defined your existence no longer relevant, and even to be undesirable.
Draw the line. Promote the conservative movement. Establish the platform and conservatives will ally.
maverick muse on May 6, 2008 at 4:19 PM
I just can’t spell, type or spell check LOL. At least I can laugh at myself. :)
upinak on May 6, 2008 at 4:22 PM
“Allah and Michelle and other here are tough on ALL politicans because you have to hold their feet to the fire to get honest answers.
Again this blog and others dont reach millions of people most people get their political info from a varity of sources. ”
W. Amos
So…you agree that Michelle, while holding feet to the fire…contributed to a McCain nomination.
They may not reach millions via any one particular blog, William, but you cannot deny that issues discussed in the blogosphere are what drive prime-time media-coverage quite often.
As Red Pill pointed out Allah, you swearing to God is like anyone else swearing to a dachshund.
Al-Ozarka on May 6, 2008 at 4:33 PM
And…I’ll say this:
Michelle’s influence was marginal at best…and that can be proven by her being completely sold-out for Romney, showing it daily on her blog, and having Romney rejected by conservatives anyway.
Al-Ozarka on May 6, 2008 at 4:36 PM
Hark, the clarion cry of the disappointed Huckabee supporter, whose disgruntlement leads him into outright hallucinations.
Michelle was completely sold out for Romney on a daily basis, sport? Shouldn’t be hard to prove, then. Pick any week at random in her archives and link five or six pro-Romney posts of hers from that week right here. Show your work.
Allahpundit on May 6, 2008 at 4:38 PM
Allah, are you serious?
“Pick any week at random in her archives and link five or six pro-Romney posts”
Only five or six? Isn’t ONE sufficient considering NONE of her posts were critical of Romney?
Come on!
She banned me from commenting on her blog for even suggesting she was sold-out.
Because my aim was true…and it bit her in the arse.
Al-Ozarka on May 6, 2008 at 4:44 PM
Why did you call me “sport”?
Sorta like I called Michelle “sweetheart”?
Okay, I get it.
Al-Ozarka on May 6, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Snorting over here… OMG you are killing me! HAHHAHAA!
upinak on May 6, 2008 at 4:48 PM
“Hark, the clarion cry of the disappointed Huckabee supporter…”
Oh…so you’re in no way disappointed with our glowing nominee, AP?
You’re damned RIGHT I’m disappointed. Mainly with pundits like you, Michelle, Rush, etc.
For being so VERY dishonest about the best candidate in the race.
Al-Ozarka on May 6, 2008 at 4:52 PM
I just searched “Romney” on Michelle’s site and found not ONE SINGLE post criticizing him.
She did, however, complain about his emotional display once and suggested he “suck it up”. I guess that’s something.
I also found THREE complimentary posts about Romney on one single day in early February.
Is that good enough?
Al-Ozarka on May 6, 2008 at 5:00 PM
Eh? If there were penguins in the clip, they’re no longer there…
Seixon on May 6, 2008 at 5:30 PM
Even Rush himself didnt back any candidate and that also contributed to a McCain victory. Many conservative blogs did back Fred and it didnt give him victory.
To blame one blog for McCain’s win flies in the face of all the evidence out there that too many republicans just felt it was McCain’s turn to have the nomination. Until we face the problem we have of only backing the highest ranking Republican in our nomination process there will be little change.
William Amos on May 6, 2008 at 5:31 PM
Damn you almost convinced me that I posted in the wrong thread. I started looking for Al Gore in here
William Amos on May 6, 2008 at 5:32 PM
Huckabee’s a terrible candidate. He would have gotten destroyed in the general. And there was no dishonesty about him. You’re just mad that he flamed out.
As expected, you’ve got no evidence for your claim that Michelle was in the tank for Romney. Complimenting a candidate when he does something right isn’t proof of being in the tank. On the contrary, she specifically refused to endorse anyone, something that should have been easy for her if she was such a Romney shill.
I can understand why she banned you, though. Quit impugning her. She eats enough crap from the left elsewhere that I’m going to let it happen on our own site.
Allahpundit on May 6, 2008 at 5:35 PM
What everyone is forgetting is the blogosphere isn’t a silver bullet. A candidate needs more than to simply look good on tv (Romney), do well in debates (Huckabee), handle talk radio, or successfully deal with the MSM (McCain). With the public’s divided attentions attentions no one form of media will win for a candidate.
Weblogs influence other media so they do have more power than simply their numbers. After almost 15 years we still underestimate the power of the hyperlink.
Yet we shouldn’t overestimate weblogs’ power either. They have the ability to plant seeds, amplify their reach, and direct action. It’s likely they won’t ever have the same power as television did when there were three networks. That’s in the internet’s distributed DNA.
The simple fact for the GOP this round was there wasn’t a single candidate that was good enough to rally the base. Everyone had faults that prevented the base from grouping around him. Eventually money ran out for others leaving McCain as the last man standing.
seanhackbarth on May 6, 2008 at 6:00 PM
Way back in the run-up to the 2004 election, I was thrilled to discover blogs that voiced my own conservative political thoughts. I was not alone, I discovered. There was a whole network of thinking people out there. In many ways, I think that we are indeed the silent majority who have found a way to connect with like-minded people, and our reach extends beyond our own borders.
In 2003, when I cancelled my subscription to a major Pittsburgh paper after it had run an unflattering photo of Condi Rice, I told the gal in the circulation department that I found the editorial stance of the paper abhorrent. She replied, “Huh?” Her response had the depth of many of that rag’s news and editorials.
onlineanalyst on May 6, 2008 at 6:02 PM
Your doing good work here Allah, your making the world a better place, sincerely … and I don’t know why your so glum.
Maxx on May 6, 2008 at 8:24 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »