tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post5397867167238805122..comments2024-03-19T07:13:54.443-04:00Comments on the daily howler: Supplemental: Still pounding a tale from 1992!<b>bob somerby</b>http://www.blogger.com/profile/02963464534685954436noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-5647131960619285682014-11-12T13:58:41.935-05:002014-11-12T13:58:41.935-05:00So, you support the theory that Gore did not lose ...So, you support the theory that Gore did not lose because he was a bad candidate or that he did not run an effective campaign. He lost just because of the third party candidate, Nader.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-73674198804938361632014-11-12T13:23:43.608-05:002014-11-12T13:23:43.608-05:00You know, some might say the major story to come o...You know, some might say the major story to come out that interview was W's statement that he has no regrets about the catastrophic choice to invade Iraq, which he defended in the most hapless terms imaginable. You might have noticed a certain general attempt to cast W's tenor as just another presidency, a few mistakes sure, but look at Obama! <br /> It's possible that the Daily Howler of old might have noticed this rather appalling narrative springing up slowly in the press. But, that would mean abandoning his fixation on Rachel Maddow for a few minutes, so..... Greghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288008924419574934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-18494801799659955292014-11-12T12:50:53.241-05:002014-11-12T12:50:53.241-05:00Then perhaps we should always field a good third p...Then perhaps we should always field a good third party candidate who will criticize the other candidates. We certainly can't expect the media to help us find the flaws in the stories crammed down our throats by billions of dollars in dark money ads. If Bush lost because we found out what he was doing, isn't that a good reason for him to lose?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-45782146174682825502014-11-11T12:51:47.797-05:002014-11-11T12:51:47.797-05:00Perot mainly prevented Clinton from claiming the m...Perot mainly prevented Clinton from claiming the mandate he needed to add school uniforms to his otherwise impressive list of accomplishments.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-85668773655832492232014-11-11T12:03:16.130-05:002014-11-11T12:03:16.130-05:00Everyone know what cost Bush the election 22 years...Everyone know what cost Bush the election 22 years ago was the press myth about the supermarket scanners. <br /><br />That, along with coverage of the Monkey Business monkey business and driving Ed Muskie from the race were signs of the intellectual meltdown which led to the War on Gore. Yet Bush children and their friends keep pounding on elections lost in 92. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-58978582493494768512014-11-11T11:24:11.781-05:002014-11-11T11:24:11.781-05:00Bob Schieffer is amazing. Here he is in his late ...Bob Schieffer is amazing. Here he is in his late seventies and he shows the same stamina as the youngish Rachel Maddow.<br /><br />He never quits.<br /><br />Unfortunately, based on Howler archives on pounding the tired 22 year old story of Perot costing Bush the 1992 election, I can't find where Schieffer ever started before last Sunday.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-56117739492108335212014-11-11T10:43:18.303-05:002014-11-11T10:43:18.303-05:00Some hacks never quit.Some hacks never quit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-5095404433196858732014-11-11T10:41:18.837-05:002014-11-11T10:41:18.837-05:00Even Bob's critics have to admit this is the b...Even Bob's critics have to admit this is the best Howler post about Schieffer since Bob caught him wearing Farmer Al Pants to interview Mitt Romney. Somerby really laid into him for his hypocrisy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-42429390529438272602014-11-11T10:38:40.257-05:002014-11-11T10:38:40.257-05:00I think they do it to be jackasses first and alway...I think they do it to be jackasses first and always. Liberalworld tolerates its self annointed snobbish jackassery to cover its wounds from conservatives accusing them of not being tough.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-36036908266340186762014-11-11T10:28:03.785-05:002014-11-11T10:28:03.785-05:00Yes, because everything is always about Somerby.Yes, because everything is always about Somerby.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-1741715777140425912014-11-11T07:36:05.808-05:002014-11-11T07:36:05.808-05:00We have many times seen "liberals" recyc...We have many times seen "liberals" recycle this version of history, to either demean Clinton, glorify Obama (He won without help from a third party candidate! First Democrat since Carter!), both these, just to be jackasses, or, most often, all three. This is one of those things liberals ought to have squashed out long ago, but typical liberal apathy, combined with typical liberal perversity, and typical conservative delusional thinking and opportunism, allow it to live on. Rachel Maddow's Shrug of Disgusthttp://msnbc.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-59257935476231192452014-11-11T06:36:39.324-05:002014-11-11T06:36:39.324-05:00That said, so what? Even if this myth is a widely-...That said, so what? Even if this myth is a widely-held belief on the right wing, so what? They certainly believe crazier things than that, and a son saying his father could have won a second term is hardly surprising.<br /><br />What is of far more consequence to me is Bush still trying to sell the notion that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction that he was about to give to terrorists.<br /><br />Why didn't Somerby choose that quote to write about? Perhaps because Somerby has still not expressed his "surprise" that no WMDs were found?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-16653734161965226002014-11-11T06:18:40.908-05:002014-11-11T06:18:40.908-05:00Bingo! Bush would have needed over 60 percent of t...Bingo! Bush would have needed over 60 percent of the Perot vote just to pull even with Clinton in the popular vote. A sitting president who got 38 percent of the vote wasn't going to get that.<br /><br />Plus, that's not the way we elect presidents. Go analyze the states and find 100 electoral votes going Bush's way without Perot.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-76438292150991736122014-11-10T20:56:21.554-05:002014-11-10T20:56:21.554-05:00When a sitting President gets 38% of the vote, reg...When a sitting President gets 38% of the vote, regardless of third party candidate, that is an outright rejection. Dream on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-22690952955362483952014-11-10T17:48:59.901-05:002014-11-10T17:48:59.901-05:00As W said, it's all conjecture. However Perot ...As W said, it's all conjecture. However Perot hurt Bush in 2 ways. He took votes. Away from him and he criticized him. It is conceivable that without both effects Bush might have won<br />David in CalDavid in Calhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10222355423128534221noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-36464544430169598432014-11-10T15:13:48.660-05:002014-11-10T15:13:48.660-05:00Not only was it the exit polls, every poll publish...Not only was it the exit polls, every poll published with Perot out of the race showed Clinton up substantially over Bush in a two man race. But, of course, these facts run counter to the media myth.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com