Patterico's Pontifications

9/27/2003

IS HARRY PREGERSON DECIDING IRAQ

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 1:28 pm

IS HARRY PREGERSON DECIDING IRAQ POLICY?: The New York Times reports: Iraq Leaders Seek Greater Role Now in Running Nation. Apparently, many Iraqis are complaining that the U.S. is taking too long to turn over governing power to Iraqis. The story provides one possible explanation for the delay:

Some senior American and British officials say privately that they are concerned that if an election was held today, a Shiite muslim cleric might well dominate the polling on the strength of the 60 percent Shiite share of the population.

Translation: let’s delay the election because we might not like the results if it happened now. Sounds like the judges from the Ninth Circus three-judge panel recall decision are running policy in Iraq!

(BY THE WAY: I love the way the Times reporter says that officials told him this “privately” — as in: “just between you and me . . . and anyone who reads the New York Times.”)

RETALIACRATS REDUX: Newsweek reports this

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 1:07 pm

RETALIACRATS REDUX: Newsweek reports this quote from Gray Davis, on what will happen if he is recalled by voters: “There will be a recall in retaliation because the Democrats have promised that.”

Now what could be more principled than that?

UPDATE: Kevin Murphy says: “This would be the single stupidest thing that the Democrat Party has done in my lifetime.” Wow. That is a bold statement (which Kevin accordingly puts in bold type). Kevin may overstate matters slightly, but I think he has a point: this would not appear to be one of the shrewder moves the Retaliacrats could make.

Does that mean they wouldn’t try it? I wouldn’t say that. I think retaliation is an essential part of their nature now.

ANOTHER GREAT RECALL DEBATE REVIEW:

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 11:14 am

ANOTHER GREAT RECALL DEBATE REVIEW: Can be found here. There are no permalinks, so go to the entries for 9/26/03 [Friday] and scroll down to the last, a post by John Mark Reynolds from 5:38 a.m. Sure, it’s a lot of work, but it’s worth it.

The author has a family game called: “What Disney Character?” in which you associate actual people with a Disney film character. He has done that for the 5 candidates in the recall debate. For example: “Peter Camejo is the loveable Goofy. He is wrong about everything in a harmless and innocent sort of way.”

Good stuff.

SUPPORT TOM, BY VOTING FOR

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:32 am

SUPPORT TOM, BY VOTING FOR ARNOLD: I am becoming convinced that people who support Tom McClintock (as I do) should vote for Arnold Schwarzenegger — not simply for the sake of California, but also for the sake of Tom McClintock. I say this, not as an Arnold shill, but rather as someone who has leaned towards McClintock throughout this race — and finds Arnold somewhat distasteful. (See my posts here, here, and here.) Let me explain.

My analysis will assume that, come election day, the polls will clearly show that McClintock cannot win. From everything I have seen, this is a realistic assumption to make.

If that assumption is true, then one of two things will happen (assuming the recall succeeds): Arnold will win, or Mr. N-Word Cruz Boosta-My-Taxes will win. If Mr. N-Word wins, many will never forgive McClintock. His political future could be dead. If Arnold wins, I think it is beyond dispute that people will not resent McClintock — even if McClintock did nothing to encourage his voters to vote for Arnold. No harm, no foul. McClintock could go on to contest Boxer in the next U.S. Senate race.

The logic is indisputable. Assuming that McClintock cannot win (our operating assumption), even people who care more about McClintock than anything else should want Arnold to win.

Now, it is not clear from the polls whether Arnold needs to peel off McClintock votes to win. As Fresh Potatoes recently pointed out, “most polling shows Schwarzenegger virtually tied with Bustamante,” and Republican turnout is likely to be high. However, the race is close. We should not simply hope that Arnold pulls it off; we need to help him do so.

The bottom line: A vote for McClintock is a vote for McClintock to lose by a smaller margin. A vote for Arnold is a vote for McClintock’s long-term political future. This is why strong supporters of McClintock should seriously consider voting for Arnold on October 7.

RECALL DEBATE ANALYSIS

Filed under: California Recall Election — Patterico @ 9:21 am

A reasonably funny analysis of the recall debate can be found here. (Via Slings and Arrows.)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1864 secs.