It's 2006, dammit!

This is why horse-race stories are just stupid. And I LIKE these numbers.
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/12/19/democrats_hold_edge_in_2008.html

Does anyone seriously believe these results have anything to do with what will happen in Novermber 2008?

 

Everyone wants everything quantified. That's why there's Nielsens and Arbitrons and Gene Shalut and polls every minute on the minute, from the 2008 presidency to the Bumfuck Falls News-Press jv girls volleyball Top 10. In six months -- fuck, in six weeks -- they'll probably look a lot different.

 

Looks like bad news for Romney, though.

 

Where was Clinton at this time pre-1992.

 

At the very least, those numbers might halt this ridiculous meme that the White House is McCain's and Giuliani's to fight over, and the Dems shouldn't even bother nominating anyone because none of them are electable.

However, I doubt it.

 

I'd have to guess holed up in a hotel room with Gennifer Flowers.

But that's without access to his datebook.

 

No, Gen was earlier, as I recall.
We're gonna need that datebook.
Guy -- my point exactly, by the way, except that Clinton had been the keynote speaker at the 1988 DNC, had been the president of the DLC, and already was considered so formidable that Lee Atwater already had flown to Arkansas to set up the first of the dirty-tricks operations.

 

He made it despite the '88 speech. I think he's still talking.

 

They polled Gore but not Edwards?

 

As I recall (and I could be getting my years mixed up) it was kind of a rambling speech , especially in contrast to Mario Cuomo's quite eloquent address, but Clinton was nonetheless being touted as something an up-and-comer in the party. I don't think he had the kind of instant groundswell of support that Obama's been getting.