CNN Capital Gang: Dean Nomination And Bush Landslide 3/5

[Raya]

All agree: Dean is surprise of the year.

All three of the Gang who predicted Dean would win the nomination
predicted a Bush GE trouncing of he Democrats.

1 Vote for Wes Clark -- and Democratic win.
1 Vote for Hillary Clinton -- and Democratic win.

Mark Russel comments:

"MD after Dean's name stands for Mondale/Dukakis"

Howard Dean appear to be a man of contradictory personalities and positions, advice to Dean: "relax, and enjoy being just one of your selves."

[Sean Reynolds]

1. So let me get this straight.

Dean surprised them this year. I mean he went from 2% in the polls to leading nationally. Yet, they don't feel he can continue this upswing and actually BEAT Bush? Dean's gonna beat Bush, and all the pundits will be surprised yet again.

Fools.

[Bread and Circus]

30. It makes sense in that the general electorate is much different...

than the "angry Democratic base" that is active in the
primaries.

[worldgonekrazy]

32. Don't let them convince you Dean doesn't have a shot

If they succeed into making us a bunch of defeatists who are too scared to stand up for anything then yeah, we will get our ass kicked. Stand up to the spin.

[Skwmom]

36. I think plenty of people are "not to scared to stand up for anything"

the problem is we won't get behind someone we can't trust and who we do not believe in.

[shivaji]

40. Right on bro.....the pundits also predicted Bush I trouncing Clinton in 92

[peacetalksforall]

2. Well that's about typical for CNN and their host(s)

and guests.

[leetrisck]

3. They all think they're so cute

Just wait until they have to say President Dean, President Clark, President Edwards, etc. We can do it and will.

[caledesi]

14. Yes! Makes me smile *very smugly*

[dsc]

4. You need to look up landslide

No one predicted a win by more than 4 points. That isn't a landslide.

Oh and you could have mentioned that one of the people who predicted a Democratic win basiclly had no real preference between Clark, Gephardt, and Dean.

[Raya]

6. 4 point is Absolutely a Rep Electoral Landslide. Bush Won with 0 points

[dsc]

20. a landslide is at least 8 points

When Bush 1 won by 6 people still didn't count it as one.

[WillyT]

5. A Tad Disingenuous, Don't You Think ???

Both the 'other comments' were from the mouth of Mark Russel, well know D.C. political comedian.

Mentioning that would have been more accurate, if that's what you were looking for.

:shrug:

[LuminousX]

7. It is career suicide for a pundit to say Dean will beat Bush

And fundamentally, I'm not ready for them to really consider Dean a threat yet. We don't have all our pieces into position, and the more they underestimate, the easier it will be to get it all ready.

[Raya]

8. And a Career Boost to say Dean will be Dem Nominee.

[LuminousX]

15. You'll never lose your job going walking with the crowd

even if they are wrong. So if everyone is saying "Dean is it" and your are a pundit who is just a hack who wrote a few good columns in the early 90's but can't think for yourself now, just say "Dean is it" and if he isn't it... you can say "Everyone got it wrong."

[babzilla]

9. I have been remiss

welcome Raya, thanks for the other comments: We love that here.

[Cocoa]

10. don't tell me you're believing this crap...

please! Isn't Novak in this gang?

[Raya]

21. Know ANY independent ANALYST (Pundit?) Who Argues Dean Trounces Bush

Please list the links. It will give me some hope.

[Rose Siding]

22. Take heart! Here's Shields from yesterday:

MARK SHIELDS: Howard Dean was an enormous surprise -- that somebody could merge as an underdog, as a dark horse, and become the principal fund-raiser and do it all in small contributions -- you can honestly say owing nothing to the large traditional interests in either party. It is an amazing achievement and coupled with that leading in the polls coming from nowhere, it's an accomplishment of historical proportions.

MARGARET WARNER: We did go back read a few Shields and Brooks conversation, including the anchors and a year ago none of us were talking about Howard Dean. snip>

MARK SHIELDS: I want to say one thing, Margaret. At this point in 1980, Ronald Reagan trailed Jimmy Carter 61-33 in the Gallup Poll and in June, he had climbed all the way to 32 percent. And, in retrospect, it became my goodness, Reagan was always an inevitable victor. Bill Clinton at this point was running third behind both Ross Perot and George Herbert Walker Bush. So don't get ready for the inaugural yet.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/political_wrap/july-dec03/sb_12-26.html

[worldgonekrazy]

33. They are wrong more often than right

These are the same people that thought Bush was unbeatable up to a few months ago. That prediction doesn't look so strong now. Have some god damn confidence in your convictions.

[Cocoa]

34. pundit?

Stick around at DU, you'll see what most of us think of pundits. :-)

[ScrewyRabbit]

11. I predicted Robert Novak's prediction with 100% accuracy

Just shows that 3 of the panel members are rapid conservatives. Novak is Karl Rove's bitch, as we all know from the Plame affair.

[Raya]

12. I think Novak Predicted Dem Win. Hillary/Clark Ticket

[caledesi]

13. "...enjoy being just one of your selves?" This sound so much

like the crap the RW flung at Gore. This is getting old and Dean ain't gonna fall for it. Unlike Gore, he will fight back.

[Raya]

16. Mark Russel is a big Bush Basher. FACTS ARE SO BOTHERSOME!

[dsc]

23. oh really

care to list all the Bush bashes he got in tonight. It won't be a very long post.

[DancingBear]

17. Silly Raya!

Off with her head!

Heaven forbid anyone should admit that people who eat, drink and sleep politics such as The Capital Gang may actually have insight. Nope, same old, same old. Repugs at heart, fools, don't know anything, Novak, etc.

Same responses, all the time. One after the other, all the same.

Who, in your minds, actually knows politics? Was it Elenor Clift this week because she wrote a complimentary Dean piece? Last week, if I recall, she sucked, because she didn't. Is insight only insight if its positive?

[mouse7]

37. Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, David Barsamian, Amy Goodman

I'll take 5 minutes of analysis from any of those over hours from the corporate media

[Kolesar]

18. Was that Mark Shields, not Mark Russel you meant

I rather like Mark Shields.

[mouse7]

38. Was he sitting at a piano?

Mark Russell offers political analysis, I guess, but it's real vaudevillian, and his bit was already old in 1965.

[jburton]

19. Was Novak on?

He just hopes for a Bush* win so he can get a pardon when he finally gets charged with treason.

[Northwind]

24. Why do supporters of Clark (and some of the other 6, *not Kucinich folks*)

Put so much stock in what pundits say? Why do they think the pundits know anything? Is it indicative of a general trend in Dean supporters to think for themselves, while the others tend to be followers?

[shivaji]

41. If they are predicting Bush II will trounce Dean, then.....

Bush II will trounce Clark, Kerry, ot Gephardt even more!

But forget the pundits. These are the same people who predicted
Clinton would be trounced by Bush I in 1992. And Clinton was
trailing badly in polls throught 1992.

[stickdog]

25. So, are media pundits for or against Dean?

Or are they just the corporate whores they are?

[PatrioticOhioLiberal]

27. I vote for

corporate whore.

The day I let a pundit decide who I'll vote for is the day they'll haul me off to the funny farm.

:crazy:

[Scoopie]

26. Media punditry

As a former reporter, I can tell you with utmost certainty that there is a large segment of society who will NOT vote for the front-runner and/or media darling. It's an 'underdog' thing, I supposed. I'm glad Shields said his bit at the tail end - those underdog lovers didn't hear that. :D

[Capn Sunshine]

28. and what exactly do these guys know?

They live within the BELTWAY for chrissakes. Their sources are corruptable and corrupted insiders. Their opinions are echoed back to them by pandering sycophantic acolytes.

The thing all along about Dean , as I have to point out yet again since there are quite a few new folk here, is that close to half of his support is not on the traditional news-source radar. The populist leanings away from the traditional structure, the disenfranchised, the non voter, the haven't voted for ten years types. THESE do not show up in any polls, they are quite simply outside the systems.

A landslide based on WHAT? The last election was so close it went to court. Many on the fence leaner types have now convinced democrats to vote for * in droves? Is THAT what you think? That they LIKE this new direction of the country, war without end , enrichment of the richest, erosion of rights, and elimination of the social safety net? Do you realize the ridiculous leap you are positing as sound bite fact by this statement?

[karlschneider]

39. "pandering sycophantic acolytes"? Ho! Nice turn of phrase.

It's a shame so many Murkins have no clue what it means.
;-)

[CMT]

29. reminds me of '48 when 50 of the top political pundits were

interviewed in Newsweek magazine and not one of them predicted that Harry Truman would beat Tom Dewey. I have little faith in pundits--their averages haven't improved that much over the years.

[jamesarg]

31. Interesting Program

An interesting Capital Gang.

[John_H]

35. That's their story line, and they'll stick to it just like they always do.

Of course we could fuck it up royally for them by electing a nominee who can win.... Can you imagine the panic on Tweety's, Timmy's, CiCi's and Nofact's faces when Clark seals up the nomination?

Or the smug look of "mission accomplished" if Dean does.

Wake up. It's not too late.