This wont help…Mayor Bloomberg alleges election fraud
Some 80 precincts in Harlem recorded zero votes for Obama in the unofficial count.

There are plenty of people arguing that the same error could have been made by mistake more than 80 times (and counting!), but the mayor is less sanguine. Certainly, if the system for administering elections was based on competence (and if the special-interest induced gridlock in Albany hadn’t prevented the State from certifying new machines some time in the last 40 or more years), someone might have noticed that there’s a problem where Sen. Obama apparently got no votes in areas where he clearly had a lot of support.

And to add a side dish, an interesting story regarding Daily Kos front pagers and about the election integrity debate. . If I am not mistaken it was DHinMI whom banned me from posting there because I wouldn’t shut up about Diebold.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Feb 20 2008 20:42 utc | 3

“With Obama the general election will likely be a landslide victory for the Democrats. ”
You are so wrong. Any landslide will be for McCain – whatever the margin, a McCain victory is guaranteed.

Posted by: rjj | Feb 20 2008 20:47 utc | 5

{Previous L. Johnson post on above subject link w/a few interesting comments & links.}
Uncle, most interesting thing re yr. post is that Bloomie is publicizing it. Talk of McCain grabbing Lieberman, though I assume right wing anti-McCain yakking was meant to forestall that; so would Obamination grab Bloomie? Obamination flew in to NYC awhile ago to meet w/him. It seems clear at this point that Bloomie isn’t going to mount 3rd Party run, since Fundie isn’t frontrunner.

Posted by: jj | Feb 20 2008 21:02 utc | 7

@Uncle @3 – another rumour launched by right wingers.
Your link is to “Politico”, a republican smear site, with some quote from a republican functionary, i.e. Bloomberg.
Bloomberg refers, but doesn’t say so, to some unofficial count of the NY primaries.
That story is four days old btw: Unofficial Tallies in City Understated Obama Vote

In fact, a review by The New York Times of the unofficial results reported on primary night found about 80 election districts among the city’s 6,106 where Mr. Obama supposedly did not receive even one vote, including cases where he ran a respectable race in a nearby district.
City election officials this week said that their formal review of the results, which will not be completed for weeks, had confirmed some major discrepancies between the vote totals reported publicly — and unofficially — on primary night and the actual tally on hundreds of voting machines across the city.
…
Jerome A. Koenig, a former chief of staff to the State Assembly’s election law committee and an adviser to the Obama campaign, suggested that some of the discrepancy resulted from the design of the ballot.
…
Mr. Koenig said he seriously doubted that anything underhanded was at work because local politicians care more about elections that matter specifically to them.

So if Obama’s campaign doesn’t contest and his people say they believe the process results (still unknown) will be fair, why would anybody listen to Bloomberg and Politico?
Maybe the NY Democratic primary was fudged. But why would Bloomberg make a hussle over it and not Obama?
Bloomberg as VP? Too big an ego to take the second role.

Posted by: b | Feb 20 2008 21:26 utc | 9

qualification of rjj@8 on cloud@6
except he is there to confound the opposition, not to become the successor.

Posted by: rjj | Feb 20 2008 21:38 utc | 11

in a just world – having been a member of the weather underground – ought to be a badge of honour – tho myself find bill ayers a little too smarmy

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 20 2008 22:29 utc | 13

No way that I would want to criticise your references to Dune – I am reading “Dune – the Butlerian Jihad” at the moment. If you don’t know it, it’s a cruddy prequel written by the son and someone else. But there are interesting points: the Dune series elevates to glory Arab culture. The Fremen are based on Arab Bedouin. Nearly all the technical terms are real Arabic (see the glossary). Did you know that? Muad’dib is really mu’addib – ‘the punisher’. Also the enemy, the evil empire, is by no means the autocratic state that Bush sees, rather an oligarchy of families. For the autocratic evil enemy, it would be better to look at the Stars Wars series.
The other point that I wanted to make is that though I understand well that the point of this thread is to expose to ridicule the excessive praise of Obama that we have seen everywhere, the real point for Obama is that he is young. True that his views are not perfect, true that I went first for Clinton as an experienced politician (I would never go for McCain under any circumstances). However for me, the thought that the present decade is one of enormous change counts for the most. Both the US and Europe are in decline economically, in relation to Asia. Clinton and McCain are of the last generation and seek to remake America in the old image. Only a young candidate can adapt.
Of course, he may be assassinated, it would not be surprising if an attempt were made, but then that’s the risk that politicians run.

Posted by: Alex | Feb 20 2008 22:43 utc | 15

“Yes, that and going to Harvard count against him. At least it wasn’t Harvard Business School.”
Frankly, I couldn’t care less. The problem is American exceptionalism, and that is going to hit a brick wall in the near future. A young president has a chance of surviving the crash, Clinton and McCain are too old to react. I am not an Obama groupie.

Posted by: Alex | Feb 20 2008 23:37 utc | 17

if Obama gets the nomination, he’s going to face more or less about the same extent of mud-slinging as any other candidate would.
and some or maybe many of his detractors will hope that it hurts more because he’s Black.
only to watch Obama slip the noose as he elevates higher & higher above the meaningless-ness.

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Feb 21 2008 1:57 utc | 19

I think young Obama will be fine as long as he doesn’t spend too much time speaking to the portrait of Headmaster Reagan in the Oval Office (kind of a one-trick pony, that one, who thought the capitalius gains spell would fix everything) as the current headmaster has. This will be a big temptation, since I’m starting to suspect that Bernanke is actually a squib.
Obama’s going to have to avoid falling under Cheney’s imperious curse, but I think it’ll be a giveaway if he is spotted yelling “habeus corpus!” and levitating the Bill of Rights during his off-hours.
Oh, crap. Wrong metaphor.

Posted by: Monolycus | Feb 21 2008 4:15 utc | 21

This might well kill McCain’s campaign: NYT page 1, above the fold: For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk

Early in Senator John McCain’s first run for the White House eight years ago, waves of anxiety swept through his small circle of advisers.
A female lobbyist had been turning up with him at fund-raisers, visiting his offices and accompanying him on a client’s corporate jet. Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself — instructing staff members to block the woman’s access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity.
When news organizations reported that Mr. McCain had written letters to government regulators on behalf of the lobbyist’s client, the former campaign associates said, some aides feared for a time that attention would fall on her involvement.
….
But the concerns about Mr. McCain’s relationship with Ms. Iseman underscored an enduring paradox of his post-Keating career. Even as he has vowed to hold himself to the highest ethical standards, his confidence in his own integrity has sometimes seemed to blind him to potentially embarrassing conflicts of interest.

Now that is a full broadside if I have ever seen one … and Josh thinks there is even more to it.
Go Huckabee, go …
(Wonder who launched that story – the Democrats would probably have held this back for use in the general election – so I’d bet on some Repubs who don’t want him to be their candidate – (or Bloomberg?))

Posted by: b | Feb 21 2008 5:25 utc | 23

While I agree with r’giap that McCain is loathesome (and I would add, crazy); nonetheless I think it’s more likely that the sex rumor is a whisper campaign, bubbling up from the darkest recesses of republican thuggery. Front page NYT? The timing is too perfect. It must be a full blown play to abort the McCain candidacy. I suspect the shadowy, crablike hand of Karl Rove.

Posted by: Copeland | Feb 21 2008 6:01 utc | 25

I am working in Houston this week and last night I went to the Obama rally since it was right next store to my hotel. 25000 people in a really good mood who waited patiently for 2.5 hours to hear the same speech he has given every day for the past few months. It is a real phenomenon which few pundits have been able to describe precisely. The carefully crafted oratorical hooks and anecdotes are all bullshit of course, but people were united and ready to join the church of hope. It saddened me to think of the coming months and years of betrayal and disillusionment. It’s straw, but no one else is giving people anything to grasp at.
I wonder if he has his own team of airplane mechanics for pre-flight checks.

Posted by: biklett | Feb 21 2008 6:12 utc | 27

Didn’t Rove publicly announce in his weirdly confident way, not long ago, that there would be “lots of surprises” in this year’s campaign? Is the grand strategy to boot up Huckabee?–the folksy underdog who is a lot closer to the religious (coded racial) bug in the American psyche?
McCain is the archetypal crazy uncle, and Obama will win hearts and minds easily. But Huckabee gets to the nub of a pathology that is bad to the bone. With him, the republicans will consolidate their base, racking up the states of the Old Confederacy, the ones they always rack up. And there we are, just as in the last two elections, looking at the electoral map of 1860.
I don’t accept that Obama is a sock puppet or a snake oil salesman or stuffed with insubstantial straw. A nation sinking in despair has to be rallied. And not with the triangulating feedback or the formulas of fear. Some people worry that there’s a demagogue inside Obama’s unifying message; but I have decided that this fear is, itself, part of the corrosive legacy of George w. Bush. I don’t place uncritical trust in any politician; but even FDR campaigned with a primary view to restoring confidence. Who wants to fall in love with doom? Let’s not go there.

Posted by: Copeland | Feb 21 2008 7:38 utc | 29

Thanks to all for a good thread, informative, speculative, and without
rancor. In particular thanks to Copeland @ 20 and 25, joel hanes @ 22
and biklett @ 27 for offering some detail and local color for the benefit of the expatriates and, more generally, the non-U.S. Moonies. I agee with Ben @ 24 that it’s a bit early to declare Obama to be the Democratic nominee, although that prospect seems increasingly likely.
Election campaigns are Dionysiac, good governance is Apollonian, as are, I think, most who comment here. So there’s an intrinsic tension (well captured in Biklett and Copeland’s posts) between attempts at rational analysis, and the urge to join the dance. Although, with a nod to Oscar Wilde, the world is a tragedy for those who feel, but a comedy for those who think, nothing seems more tragic than the incapacity to feel, nor more comic than the incapacity to think. U.S. presidential election campaigns incessantly propound that vexing polarity to both voters and spectators. Few places seem to offer a better chance to reconcile the cruel duality than here.
The other posts regarding the latest broadsides against McCain and Obama indicate that this campaign will be fraught with invective and defamation, perhaps even more than is usual in such frenzied fertility rites. (Indeed, McCain’s criticism of Obama’s hair-curling proposal for U.S. armed intervention in Pakistan solely on the grounds that such projects are not to be discussed publicly, has proved that it is possible to make Obama’s gaffe seem relatively progressive for its openness if not for its content.) I look forward to the assistance of the Moonies in trying to winnow the grain from the chaff.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Feb 21 2008 8:05 utc | 31

Hannah, thanks for your statement in comment 35:
Although, with a nod to Oscar Wilde, the world is a tragedy for those who feel, but a comedy for those who think, nothing seems more tragic than the incapacity to feel, nor more comic than the incapacity to think.
Provably quotable.
Your Apollonian/Dionysian analytic gem is spot on: “Election campaigns are Dionysiac, good governance is Apollonian …”
It puts in clear perspective my thoughts about the devil you know (HRC) vs. the devil you don’t, Barack Hussein Obama.
Clinton’s well-telegraphed leadership promises to return prosperity to the USA, yet the voters seem to be craving something beyond prosperity — perhaps redemption, salvation, or at least forgiveness.
The apparent need for retaliation that fed the post-9/11/2001 attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq may be a strong factor in the country’s seeming rejection, or at least bashfulness with respect to the Republican Party (Bush) and the other current power-holders exemplified by HRC and the Democratic Party.
BHO (Obama) is something of a blank slate to us all, we have not been saturated with a message about his alliances and foibles as we have with Hillary.
So the opportunity is offered to the new guy.
To extend your theory, a candidate good at the Dionysian may well have advantages in governing as well; persuasiveness, diplomacy, the ability to gain popular support for measures outside of the mainstream.
Dangerous territory given today’s trends. But is the electorate looking towards that kind of leadership — I think so. Tempered with wisdom this would be a good thing.
On the other hand, today’s world is played with power, not love. Hillary Clinton seems to have a good handle on that practice of power, and her husband is apparently an expert at the soft skills that clothe the iron hand.
In the end the Democratic nominee comes down to the exercise of power, whether it be the power to raise money, convince voters and delegates, or even to influence judges, election officials and local vote-counting precincts.
To return to your original post, it does remain to be seen.
I look forward to your future posts.

Posted by: jonku | Feb 21 2008 9:31 utc | 33

Sorry, I was referring to Hannah K. O’Luthon’s post number 31, I mistakenly typed ‘number 35’ above.

Posted by: jonku | Feb 21 2008 9:50 utc | 35

When I think of Obama I think of something that Eugene Debs said:
“I don’t want you to follow me or anyone else. I would not lead you into the promised land if I could, because if I could lead you in, somebody else would lead you out.”
Hence the danger of Muad’Dib. And having just read several of the sequals to Dune recently, uh, having a “savior” didn’t work out too well. I prefer my leaders flawed – honest, generous, and compassionate. But knowing truly who they are. I have no idea if Obama is even near that – American reporting doesn’t exactly look at the deeper level of existence. From what I can tell, he will lead us to no promised land.
If he wins, I can see a possible problem in 4 years. The economy is going to still be for shit (that I can say with no problem – I work in finance and everything posted at MofA is pretty right on). Some (if not many) of the troops will still be in Iraq (even according to his plans). He will sort of negotiate and/or put a blockade on Iran (I’ve read the Samantha Powers crap). So I suspect he will look helpless to events. It could be he’ll come out smelling like a rose in 4 years, but I’m doubtful about his chances – even if he was a saint. This could be the big set-up for Repubs to come in and look like they will “save us”. I guess I’m comparing Obama to Carter. Becuase when you look at the foreign policy choices he will probably make and the way the economy is going, it seems to be a nasty replay of 76 – 80 coming about.
I feel deep sympathy for Obama, actually, because he’ll get what he wants. And that’s too bad for him and for all of us.

Posted by: MHall | Feb 21 2008 11:01 utc | 37

the suggestion that race is insurmountable for Black political candidates may have some merit but its not entirely true. The fact is that theres substantial, sometimes subliminal (if I can use the word though I ca’nt say it) affinity amongst many Whites not just for Black-related cultural facets but also for Black individuals and it seems to switch-on spontaneously as the Black becomes better known & more importantly, becomes liked, especially if he/she does’nt come off as too “pushy”.
The big factor thats too often overlooked is the Black contribution to whats known as American culture & lifestyle & language. The essence of an “alternative” Black culture probably took root in the period when Blacks outnumbered Whites in the Old South (I read this somewhere) and possibly what was the entire union at the time. And that essence has survived till today. Its most visible contribution is in music. And perhaps one of the most off-the-wall contributions by Blacks to American culture is tap-dancing and all Americans seem to love it. Theres also the language itself, arts, sports, comedy, literature, lifestyle, food, TV, movies … And politically, its the prime reason why Bill Clinton is known as the first Black President.
Hence, it should not be too surprising that a strong Black candidate whose also very likable is able to tap into that “underground” reservoir of affinity.
[It should also be noted that Blacks have made many many significant but less heralded contributions to American Science, inventions & architecture.]

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Feb 21 2008 12:24 utc | 39

Only now had time to read the McCain story – not much in there. “Staff was concerned that McCain might have a relation …” That’s all in real news-value and a bit too thin to stick for long …

Posted by: b | Feb 21 2008 17:17 utc | 41

Remember that the Atreides are not really good (or democratic in any sense), they are just more loyal to their friends and servants
the Dune series elevates to glory Arab culture. The Fremen are based on Arab Bedouin. Nearly all the technical terms are real Arabic (see the glossary). Did you know that? Muad’dib is really mu’addib – ‘the punisher’. Also the enemy, the evil empire, is by no means the autocratic state that Bush sees, rather an oligarchy of families.
Herbert himself said that part of the story was to show how, at the end of the day, great heroes, inspiring leaders and these kind of grandiose historical figures are quite a bad thing.
I agree with all of these.
I’m sure we all realize that like The Lord of the Rings, Dune is *applicable*, not strictly allegorical (a distinction Tolkien noted).
Of course superheroes are very problematic. The CIA helped to create one in Osama bin-Ladin, and it got us — an icon with very little connexion to reality, for which men blow themselves up on one hand, and against which the USA spends itself into disaster on the other.

Posted by: Cloud | Feb 22 2008 1:42 utc | 43

Which creates a backlash among parents.

Posted by: rjj | Feb 22 2008 3:17 utc | 45

Hey, you don’t have to think back very far to 1983, Ronald Reagan neo in office, the economy going down the Volker rathole, Disco Duck and long lines of blow in the can.
If someone had told me the World was going to end, back then, I’d have said, well,
halleluah, let’s do another line! Then came integrated chips seeming out of nowhere,
and what we all at MoA must now freely admit is an unparalleled unfathomable miracle.
I can sit here typing, and you can read it anywhere in the world, essentially free.
And we’re not all wearing vests, loud shirts, sparkling eatable-crotch bell bottoms.
I’m listening to streaming audio Goa Deep Trance, and if it doesn’t serve up free,
there’s a thousand other stations ready to. I can watch any movie for free, any
TV show for free, thousands of personal videos and photos and the click of a button,
I can talk long-distance for free with any of you, even e-video with a mini-cammie.
Last night I watched a mathematical genius demonstrate SAGE open-source live on the
internet, with algorithms 100x faster than anything available subscription based,
and any day now, someone is going to open a website TeleCom.com, and we can park
our automobiles and VPN into our offices, with our bosses watching us on e-video.
No cars, oil goes away, gold goes away, housing becomes truly valued as a place
that you live, instead of a place that you sleep, energy demand drops, we eke out
a new frontier in … who knows? Computers were supposed to free us from the sheer
drudgery of labor. Back in the ’60’s, I manufactured a million auto parts in some factory one summer, and got a blue ribbon from the office side. Way to go, kid!
Now each of us has the power to manufacture a million bucks, right in our hands.
These are truly marvelous times to be alive. Enjoy them. Screw the naysayers. Tell
John McCain to get a job as a guard in the Big House. Tell Hillary to go cook up
some flap jacks, and make it quick. Ha,ha,ha. (Yeah, that’ll happen). I know that
broad, she’s your worst nightmare, like Madeleine Albright talking dead Iraqi kids.
Well, sometimes it’s worth it. OK, well, who would like to lead us all in prayer?
My point is, don’t get caught up on Neo-personality-ism, it’s the Spice itself.
Kill the TV, forget the elections, everything is the same as it ever was/will be.
Figure out a way to use this marvelous machine/media to make your life enriched.
Obama is like Hoola Hoops. Who the farc cares? There are 28,000,000 homeless US!
Don’t become one by personality cultism, when you could be finding the New Path.
“A billion here, and a billion there, and you’re talking about real money!” Dirksen

Posted by: Wai Lapeng | Feb 22 2008 6:00 utc | 47

Security stand-down in Dallas
U.S. Secret Service TELL Dallas Police to stop protecting Barack Obama.
Aside from the fact that this story ALONE serves the purpose of ‘normalizing’ this as the ‘incompetence’ meme. Or as others have said, message is not intended for the public, but as a message to Obomba.
My prediction still holds.

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Feb 22 2008 12:19 utc | 49

@40 – a perfect analogy with beauty in it’s spareness, thanks for the mordant chuckle Tantalus

Posted by: jcairo | Feb 22 2008 12:42 utc | 51

Following the posts here, I went to youtube to indulge my eyes with some Obama, having seen nothing of him except his mug in the pulp. I had no particular expectations or image.
Well, he is classy alright, as he is trim, moves OK. His dress seems to be (because i only looked at a few vids/pics) just right, in the sense that it is calculated to be proper and invisible (the man, not the clothes), with tiny touches of informality (no tie sometimes) that don’t carry a symbolic charge. He favors dark colors with the conventional light colored shirt – which both temper and display his skin color. Along the same principle, his (when chosen) backgrounds are neutral and everyday without hominess. I could burble on about his arm and hand gestures but enough…
To me, he doesn’t feel black. (Some assumed traces in his speech?) He is white with a dark skin. (harvard law, etc.) He is a foreignor, an outsider, a kind of changeling, and in that sense a figure on whom many can project.
Respectability and sincerity – and his political message – are center stage. He is serious and controlled, which makes a welcome change from the usual slipshod buffoonery and Hill’s obviously calculated attitudes, stances, responses, etc. Billy C and Maggie Thatcher, to mention a woman, were far superior on ‘sincerity’ because they lived and breathed politics, and so were – temporarily – sincere.
Of more interest is his message in speeches on different occasions. Better, more, etc. health care, pensions, oil security, unemployment insurance/payments, “progress for ordinary Americans”, using common interests and a common purpose to solve problems in a “practical” way, putting Main Street ahead of Wall Street. Ending empty bickering in Washington. “Americans can’t wait” etc. Fine.
His health plan is utopia mixed with fuzz n buzz, puts forward many ideas that a majority could agree with, but gives no hints as to how the whole could be implemented. Pipe dreams. (He did inhale, I read!)
The US already has socialized health care (Medicare, Medicaid, emergency rooms, subsidized hospitals, Gvmt. programs, etc.) and endures with large contributions from those who can pay. The problems are systemic rather than re-distributive. To extend ‘socialized’ health care to adult workers and the uninsured would take, off the cuff, a tax hike of *at least 10%*, flat tax for all.
obama health prog.

Posted by: Tangerine | Feb 22 2008 17:55 utc | 53

For Barack Obama, (vs Hill, as Edwards and blank etc. bulletins are minuscule), seen from my small spot:
In Geneva, 78%
In Switz. internet votes, 58 (here we often separate these out to compare them to totals)
total Switz, 72
total world, US citizens abroad, 65
The internet voting went fine. Afaik, of course.

Posted by: Tangerine | Feb 23 2008 15:25 utc | 55