I'm surprised that nobody else has brought this up, but listening to Mike Malloy's radio show last night was quite depressing.  Of all people, the last person I expected to espouse a defeatist (and borderline nihilistic) take on the 2008 election was Malloy.  The short of it is that he was advocating the election of John McCain in 2008, because the big change that this country needs won't happen unless things get even worse than they are right now.  Malloy is always teetering on the edge with some of his more outlandish takes, but at least I had the sense that he wants what's best for the country.  After last night, I'm not so sure.

Research 2000 for Daily Kos. 6/30-7/2. Likely voters. MoE 4% (3/31-4/2 results)

Independents disapprove of George Bush 14/86, so that has a clear effect on Lieberman's approval ratings. He is even less popular with Democrats while more Independents now disapprove of his performance than approve. While Lieberman's approval ratings continue to fall, the matchups with Lamont were largely unaffected compared to a couple of months ago.

Other findings from the poll -- Obama crushes McCain 57-35 in Connecticut, and Lieberman would actually hurt McCain on the ticket in the state. Let's hope McCain picks him.

My biggest fear is that Lieberman retires in 2012. I want him defeated at the ballot box. And until then, this poll, along with yesterday's Q-poll, should go a long way toward dispelling the notion that Lieberman is popular. His loving embrace of Bush and McCain, along with his rabid warmongering, have definitely killed his support at home.

Full crosstabs can be found below the fold.

One Term Obama?

Like many of you I'm fairly confident that Obama has the general election pretty well sorted-out.  There are numerous reasons for this: Obama's campaign is better organized and funded, the Republican party suffers from a  "throw the bums out" syndrome, and McCain will sink on the issues, ranging from Iraq, to the economy, to health care.  We can be fairly sure that an Obama administration will be inaugurated in January with a healthy majority in both houses of Congress; we can only hope that the Dems do not use the mandate to cause massive damage to the country as was the case from 2001-2006.  

So my mind is already wandering ahead to the next big presidential election in 2012.  And I predict that the GOP's darling and rising star, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal, will emerge as the challenger.

There have been a myriad of calls for changes to our Democratic Primary system, with the simply stated goal of making the process better. Of course, what makes a "better" system is open to interpretation, but most can agree that any reforms be beneficial to the voters and the Party.

Of course, simply stated goals often have complex solutions. The idea of abolishing limited-participation Caucus contests sounds good at first, until you read how effectively Kos made the case for the Caucus. Same-day hybrid systems would seem to have the best of both worlds, until you go back and look at the mess that was the Texas contest from this year and the shenanigans in both the campaigns and media surrounding the question of who "won" Texas. Changing to a National Primary/Caucus Day could solve the Iowa/NH problem while creating still greater new ones.

The solution I hit upon follows after the fold.

As an Obama supporter I have been dissappointed by the tone of Clinton's campaign these past 2 month--and to top it off--she didn't even congratulate him tonight on this historic of historic nights.  My friend and I had a discussion about it and despite my dissappointment with Clinton's non-congratulatory speech I realized that there are two compelling arguments for putting her on the ticket (and zillions of reasons not to).

I still hope Obama goes for the Webb or Gore or Schweitzer or Richardson pick but I think there is something behind this rationale for a Clinton VP nod.

Below the cut

By endorsing Obama, live on national television after Obama reaches 2118  delegates from the South Dakota and Montana primaries and (possible) superdelegate endorsements, tomorrow night.

And then by working her heart out, alongside her husband, at the same impressive pace she displayed in her amazing primary campaign performance over the past 18 months.

By helping Obama raise $500 million in the general election campaign.    http://www.ft.com/...

Read on, its not much.

Now that this thing is over...

Or anyway, as over as it will get until the corpse of the primary season is actually prepared and buried...or even better, cremated, since it would be so much more difficult for someone to reanimate it that way...

We could go on to the general election, and indeed we shall, but before we do I think we must spend a brief moment reflecting on the utter lunacy of the road we have just traveled.  Yes, folks: I’ve said it: the primary system is a mess, and the Democrats have just spent the last three months ripping open all of the bandages we have been placing on it for years.

Lots of words have been written on this, and I must give a huge shout-out to kossack Nathaniel Ament Stone, whose A Better Primary System in 2012 laid out a really thought-provoking concept that I lean heavily upon herein.

The question that needs addressing is what will happen to democratic delegations from state democratic parties that break the Democratic National Committee rules.

This is not a new idea.  As I have followed this race and listened to bloggers, pundits, and regular folk express disbelief as this campaign continues seemingly forever to unfold, I have been struggling to make sense of it.

Screw you.  Screw America. I went "all-in" with millions of my own money because I knew you suckers would keep sending me money as long as I was in the race.

That's why I'm still in this thing - just in case, and to scrape as much dough from the poor saps who support me whom are too stubborn or too dim to see what a basically dishonest and devious person I am.

By Stonecipher from Eyes on Obama:

After the votes are counted in Oregon and Kentucky tonight Barack Obama will have clinched a pledged delegate victory, but the Clintons are ambitious and stubborn and aren't going to let their dreams of returning to the White House die. So with 2008 all but gone, Clinton is setting herself up for another run in 2012.

Check out our new Veepstake sectionon Eyes On Obama to be sort of a clearinghouse of information on the leading contenders for the VP spot on the ticket.  We're going to be adding the ability to compare contenders, vote for your favorite, and more. Let us know of anything else we should do, because after tonight, talk about the potential VP is going to get louder. New Veepstake section
We've set up a Veepstakes forum as well: Veepstake forum

There have been may people on this site who have doubted Hillary would want the Vice Presidency.  I think they're wrong, as too many Hillary surrogates have been floating the idea of her being VP over the past week for it to be merely a coincidence.  

And despite what people think, Hillary needs a reconciliation as much, if not moreso, than Obama...  

So here we are three days after the nomination race is finally, completely, unattainble for the junior Senator of NY.  

Is Hillary hoping for another grab at the ring in 2012?

After 8 years of the bush administration, wars and bad economy, the American people are eager for change. The DP has started the year with a great hope, and almost certainty, to win back the White House.
Many events had happened since then that had cast doubts about that certainty and turned the big hope into big worry. I believe, that one of those events, is Sen. Clinton’s determination that she must win the nomination regardless of the price that the DP and the American People will pay for it.

Sen. Clinton has been helping the GOP tremendously, by ignorance or by design. Many rumors and speculations are circulating around the net and among some DP leaders that the Clintons are doing great harm to the party, determining to do every thing possible, without being obvious, to sabotage Sen. Obama’s Chances of winning the White House, so that Sen. McCain wins the White House in November and Clinton can make another run in 2012. They are ignoring the rules of the DP and deciding to set their own rules.

So which rules make sense? Let’s find out.

I'd like to think Clinton isn't trying to make Obama lose in the GE so she can be the candidate in 2012.

I'd like to think, as suggested by some reports, that she believes Obama would be weak in the GE, so weak that he would lose on his own, and that she is just pointing out lines of attack the GOP would use, and that damage she is doing now would be inevitable.

I do feel, though, that maybe especially when she thinks about the math she might think that being the "voice of reason" in 2008 might position her well for 2012.

Hillary has poisoned the well.

She wants to be the savior in 2012.  So badly that she has tried to destroy the support Obama had sparked in independents and disillusioned republicans, by scaring them, and the superdelegates, into thinking that the racists are larger in number than they really are.

Sadly, the only possible ways that Mccain can lose now:

1. They do the worst thing possible and nominate Hillary and Obama accepts VP and he works devotedly to get them over the top.

2. They do the right thing and nominate Obama, and he somehow miraculously manages to do it again - that is, find a way to re-set/re-frame the whole situation in an inspiring way that reaches out, again, to all those embittered republicans and independents and newly registered voters.

Ah but the caveats...