1. High Hopes (With John Kennedy) — Frank Sinatra
2. Have A Nice Trip — Merv Griffin
3. Russian Bandstand — Spencer & Spencer with the Sonya Pryor Choir
4. Hello, Lyndon! — Ed Ames with the “Hello Dolly” Male Chorus
5. We Need Nixon — Lionel Hampton & The Inner Circle
6. The Ballad Of Jim And Tammy — Tammy Faye Bakker
7. I Swung The Election — Jack Teagarden & His Orch.
8. V.O.T.E. — Chris Stamey Experience
For a limited time, you can download the tracks here.
I needed something to cheer me up after Edwards dropped out of the race (video of his speech here; he is awesome), so I put together a little political playlist from a bunch of novelty songs I downloaded a while ago. The anti-drug track, the Russian track, and the Tammy Faye track I justify as being political enough as well as simply groovy. The Chris Stamey Experience is of course Chris Stamey backed by none other than Yo La Tengo.
I needed something to cheer me up after Edwards dropped out of the race…
But Dave, the news isn’t all bad; Ralph Nader is in.
I *love* your title dave. super sexy.
Hey, nice title Dave. I’m quite sure the classical theorists would agree with you.
I’m with you on Edwards. Maybe he will join Obama as the VP candidate before Super Tuesday. Those two would make a winning combo against all comers.
That would be so awesome, Rogan.
On the other hand, how would they fare against a McCain/Huckabee super-mecha-nutjob ticket?
I just got done watching Street Fight and couldn’t help but see Booker/Obama comparisons.
My concern is that Obama will get chewed up by the attack machine on the right. I agree that he could be the candidate to break out of triangulation and the nonsense of pandering to the undecided 5-10% of the “centrist” voter but on the other hand I worry that by portraying himself as somehow above the fray he’ll be brutally SwiftBoated/Hortoned as he is patronized to his face by the Republican nominee.
I don’t want to be a sucker and vote for Hillary merely because I think she has the experience and temperament to fight back strongly enough to win against such attacks but someone explain why my worst fears will not come to pass-especially when confronted by the nightmare scenario of McCain/Huckabee?
Hillary and Obama debate tonight. It should be good.
Dave, I’m surprised that you don’t see the real nightmare scenario: McCain/Brownback.
There is no question in my mind that a McCain-Clinton general election goes to the bad people. She will unify the pockets of republicans that McCain can’t. This is why Obama must win.
As for an Obama/Edwards ticket, I understand its attractiveness, but I don’t see it happening. I think he needs to draw an executive, perhaps Richardson.
Scott, so the Republicans will somehow acquiesce in the face of Obama? I like the guy too but don’t understand why he’s going to be given a free pass. That’s one reason I think these old line Kennedy style endorsements would actually work against him in a general campaign. I understand that McCain supposedly doesn’t animate their base but even with or without a Gestapo quality VP I think they’ll fall in line to defeat whatever the Dems can come up with.
Hillary’s negatives are through the roof but Obama is a blank canvas in terms of what kind of vicious smears, let alone sheer racism, the right is going to successfully tie to him. People who don’t like Hillary aren’t going to vote for her no matter what but I believe that supposedly openminded people will suddenly find new and compelling reasons why Obama has in fact been the Anti-Christ all along and thus feel completely justified in casting their lot with McCain-holding their nose or not.
McCain is an old crank who could very well self destruct in a hard fought general election…and Limbaugh is still bashing the guy as being less than a true believer. The economy keeps going into the tank and McCain talks like “winning” Iraq is still what it’s all about. I don’t have to convince any of you of how misguided he is but I do think he is vulnerable.
Nominating Hillary means that we go back to hoping to win 52-48 and hope we are cheated down to a mere 51-49 margin of victory. But I think she can do it.
Nominating Obama means that we could somehow reshape the paradigm (but how exactly?) and run away with this thing but I can see him losing equally big as well.
I do agree about Richardson, the guy has had VP written all over him since the beginning-especially if Obama gets the nod. But I have serious doubts of an Obama/Richardson ticket being able to pull this thing off (and it pains me to write this in what should be a slam dunk-apologies to George Tenet-election cycle).
Edwards-classic case of good message with the wrong messenger.
Sorry Ruben, but I fear Scott’s right. I agree that the right will find all kinds of lies to smear across the blank canvas of Obama if they need to, and will open the door on racism unheard of since the 1800s. Still I think that in a Clinton-McCain election, the moderates would go for McCain even if they had been planning to vote Obama. But of course the corruptible voting machines will make this all a moot debate anyway. Hunker down for the Armageddon and the United States of Amerigod.
Hey, Steph, that’s why I’m a registered Apathetic.
Ruben, I think that Obama would be spared the usual intense level of attacks in a race against McCain for a few reasons:
First, McCain does poorly when he’s on attack mode. He’s just not that kind of politician. I understand that he can use a Swiftboat style proxy to achieve the attack, but Obama is not vulnerable in the same way that Kerry was. By that I mean, that he seems to have his feet a little more firmly on the ground. I don’t think Kerry, in a million years, thought that he would be attacked on his Vietnam record. Obama (I’m assuming) has learned from this and would be prepared to handle a head-on attack.
Second, Obama is incredibly likeable. This may seem naïve of me to point out, but I think an attack on him would not go over well because of his projected, positive attitude, and ultimately, attack ads backfire. Also, because he’s done such a good job at co-opting ‘hope’ that an attack on him may seem like an attack against hope.
Finally, prepare yourself: because he’s African American. As I see it, the people that are not going to vote for him because of his race are probably Republicans anyway, and any type of racist attack will completely backfire, especially against McCain, because he is banking on moderate voters.
I totally agree with you steph. I think all this is a moot point. I think McCain will probably win
Dave, I’m sorry Edwards stepped out also. I really liked his presence in the debates. He is talking about things that no one else is. I’m not sure we’ve seen the last of him though. As for the Hillary/Obama/McCain discussion, here are my thoughts (full disclosure, I’m working with the Obama campaign here in California):
The old guard Republicans are going to bully and smear any Democratic candidate. But they really hate the Clintons. If Hillary is nominated and elected, her presidency will be consumed with battling the “vast right wing conspiracy” and getting even on old grudges, and we will all be worse off for it.
If Obama is nominated, the Republicans will still play dirty (although I’m not sure they can out do the Clintons on that), but they don’t have a lot of ammo. And he’s proven that he can deal with dirty politics in a fairly elegant and effective manner. I think he can absolutely beat out McCain in an open election, and I think he will.
I agree with Steph regarding the potential for racism, but that element of our society is always just below the surface and maybe its time we look it in the eye. I can’t think of a better way to snuff out racism than to have an African American leading the country.
I’m not saying Obama is going to solve all our problems, or that he’ll deftly deliver our country from the mess we’re in to some Utopian paradise, but he represents a change of direction, a fresh start, and that’s a rare opportunity in life (and politics), and it’s something this country desperately needs.
The Republican Party is composed of a coalition of a number of constituencies, and this year there’s no one presidential candidate who has been able to unite the Republican coalition. Bush and Reagan united the coalition brilliantly. (Bush 41 was less successful, but still managed.)
McCain is beloved of the foreign-policy hawks but hated by “movement conservatives” for his heresies of promoting campaign finance reform and opposing Bush just a little bit. Evangelicals don’t love McCain either. Romney is beloved of movement conservatives (Limbaugh, the National Review, etc. have all been supporting him), but he’s too slick and too Mormon for the raw-meat party base. Evangelicals love Huckabee, but he scares the shit out of the guys who run the party. Whomever the Republicans nominate will face significant apathy from a fair portion of Republican voters in November.
Only Hillary can unite the Republican Party in 2008.
Only Hillary can unite the Republican Party in 2008.
Well put, Dave.
Who is this Obama moderate that would vote for Obama over McCain but McCain over Clinton…and haven’t we lost/been cheated out of the last two elections in part by chasing such supposedly undecided voters?
I get the idea that Hillary somehow animates the Republicans like none of their own but am I hearing that the other side will get out and vote for a candidate they are apathetic toward solely because of animus towards anyone named Clinton?
As for the race element; I agree that in many ways Obama would force the Republicans to bring their racisim out into the open but I also doubt the effectiveness of any accompanying backlash. I just can’t picture the voter who would otherwise vote for McCain but somehow be motivated to go with Obama because he or she was disgusted by such tactics.
I think the qualities that make Obama attractive ultimately doom him in our current political environment. He is running as a transcendent figure who will somehow transform our discourse and leave partisanship as we know it in the past. I have my doubts but even if this is the case I think it leaves him particularly vulnerable to attack. Attack ads work, people say they don’t like them but polling consistently shows that they are relatively cheap and effective compared to trying to articulate a positive, meaningful agenda. If Obama’s whole message is that he is above such dirty politics then he can’t effectively fight back but if he does, as he must to win, then he negates his whole message of standing for a new way.
I’m still holding out hope for a Romeny win as I think he is the easiest to defeat come November.
am I hearing that the other side will get out and vote for a candidate they are apathetic toward solely because of animus towards anyone named Clinton?
Were you around during the ’90s at all?
Yeah, the person named Clinton won…twice.
Yes, but I thought the question was whether Clinton-hatred motivated Republican voters. My sense is that it did, although if anyone has any data on the question I’d love to see them.
In any case, although I’ve been making an electability argument for Obama in this thread, I think the real reason to support him over Clinton is that we know what to expect with Clinton: more Clintonism — more triangulation, more centrism, vague hawkishness in foreign policy, continued disappointments for real progressive causes. Whereas with Obama there’s a good chance (not 100% by any means) that we’ll see some real leadership towards real progressive goals.
The country has been seriously abused by 8 years of Bush. It will take more than a competent center-right Democrat like Clinton to really begin to repair the damage, let alone make up for lost ground on so many issues (health care, global warming, economic inequality) that have been utterly neglected by the current administration.
I have to age that Hillary Clinton seems to be the only possible unifying factor for getting out the Republican vote. She really is that polarizing.
Case in point: My mother, a lifelong Democrat (in Florida, so her vote matters), has told me more than once that she will never vote for Hillary, no matter who she’s running against. Period. Further, my father, a lifelong Republican, absolutely stunned me recently by saying he was considering voting for Obama.
Yes, Obama is untested so far on the national stage. That’s beginning now. Maybe he will stumble. But if he continues to perform as he has in the last few months, I think he is the real deal. He does get people excited about politics again. He does bring out the vote. And that’s the way to win in November.
Oops, I mean “agree.” I have to age, too, but it has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton. That’s Mitt Romney’s fault.
He does bring out the vote.
How do you explain the 50% to 30% Clinton victory in FL, then? I think this race is bringing out the votes — twice as many democrats as reps in many places, and *that* will be good for us in the end, no matter who gets the nomination.
Obama didn’t really campaign in Florida, for one thing, because there were no delegates to be won. Given how many people (including Democrats) there are who actively dislike Hillary, I do think he would get out more Democratic voters in November than she would. I’m not saying that’s a good or bad thing; I just think it’s the case.
By the way, did any of you read the horrible poem Maya Angelou wrote endorsing Hillary Clinton?
How do you explain the 50% to 30% Clinton victory in FL
In the absence of primary campaigning in Florida, Hillary won on name recognition and residual goodwill among rank-and-file Democrats.
does maya angelou ever write poems that *aren’t* horrible? but i agree, endorsement poems have to be among the worst kind of occasional poems you could come up with.
#26 — i’d venture that obama is pretty much a household name.
that said, i’m voting for obama on tuesday. and i can’t wait to see how those returns pan out. this should be interesting.
i’d venture that obama is pretty much a household name.
I suspect you’d be surprised. Or that at best there are a lot of people who would say, “Obama? Sure, I’ve heard of him … uh … uh … he’s that skinny black guy running for President, right?”
Does anyone think that the gender issue matters? I have a horrible feeling it will come down to the more deep-seated prejudices people hold. What’s worse, if you have those prejudices? A white woman or a black man? Obviously, neither colour nor gender should make any difference. But they will to some people.
Okay, so maybe I’m wrong about McCain not attacking Obama on racial grounds. Am I way behind, or has anyone else read about the ‘gook’ comment?
And how about Obama raising more money in a month than any other candidate ever?
Very little that McCain could say or do would surprise me. He is not a good guy.
Did anyone watch the debate last night? Impressions? (I don’t have cable and generally hate watching these things — this is the first one I would have liked to have seen.)
Yes that was an awful name, anybody have any thoughts on ron paul or edwards
i mean a awful poem
Indeed that is an awful poem:
Also:
Oh, Dave, give the woman a break, she is 79! It sounds pretty cool if you rap it.
Hilary’s been there done that mynizel
Yo, yo, check it out, she’s still risen
All she needs is a hip tune to go with