Left Times, RIP

Check out the new site.

www.polexicon.com

Thanks to everyone that stopped.

The left times is changing hands. We will be offline for a short while while the change is made.

Hello folks.

I apologize for the lack of my updating in the last day or so. I have been shopping around and looking at changing the blog format to movable type. It's just so damn classy, and I'm a whore for having everything hosted in house. I've spent more time researching how to set that up and how much it would cost than actually looking at political news, but here are some highlights I have come across:

John Kerry finally looks to be getting his bounce his bounce in the polls as many cite Bush's collapse (44 percent approval, say it with me now!): That means those unnamed Dems that were worried should shut up now. Oh, and we've opened a significant lead in Ohio. Things are looking good for us.

The Reform Party has endorsed Ralph Nader, in the process granting him access to his first state ballots, but it seems a snarky little law in Florida may prevent him from hitting that particular ballot up. All that said, people are making too big a deal out of this: Nader on any ballot under any party will be lucky to get more than 1 percent of the vote. People aren't stupid.

Back to typepad/movable type/scoop research..I will probably be blogging again shortly.

Folks, we fall in to two categories for the most part. Some have no money and a lot of time, some have a lot of money and no time. Now, with the new "Support the Cause" section on the right side of your screen, you can help out in something we all want: The downfall of the Republican party.

Here I have listed several candidates for office at the national level, and organizations that help them. If you have any extra cash, contribute. If you have extra time, volunteer. Every little bit helps folks, and this year is a turning point for us.


Remember:

Kos notes just how good things are looking for us in the polls. At this juncture, Kerry is 11 points ahead of where Clinton was at this stage in the 92 race, and not only did Clinton go on to win, Bush 1 didn't have the handicap of shooting himself in the foot on a near daily basis.

Mark Mellman also goes on to note something a lot of us are guilty of forgetting:

Indeed, in most races involving incumbents the critical number is not the margin over the challenger but rather the percentage of the vote the incumbent is garnering. As sophisticated poll-watchers know, few incumbents get more votes on Election Day than they do in the last polls. Voters who are undecided at the end break overwhelmingly to the challenger.

So we're sitting pretty folks, and have nowhere to go but up. Bush's support however, has hit the ceiling. At this rate, it could be a landslide, with the pace of Bush/Bush team mistake, Kerry rebuttal. This positions Kerry, albeit in a piecemeal fashion, to set himself up to be the viable alternative to the chaotic course this country is headed in. That puzzle will complete itself in the American voters' eyes as time goes on. We have never been in a better position to win this, and win it big. We're talking setting the republican party back another decade big. Have you juiced John Kerry yet this week? If you can afford anything, this is a good time to do so. We've gone on to prove that any little bit helps, and well folks, we're winning.

Earlier this week, I posted what I thought was the short list for Vice President under John Kerry.

First Tier Candidates:
Gephardt, Vilsack, Clark, Bayh
Teetering: Edwards

My money is on Clark or Bayh..

According to Kos (source story@Bloomberg) , I was only one name off.

John Kerry, according to unnamed sources, has narrowed his short list down to five candidates, including Dick Gephardt, Tom Vilsack, Wes Clark, John Edwards, and Bob Graham, with a decision to come within a month. While the five of these guys are rather different from each other, they all seem to fit well on a Kerry ticket, each with their own balance and strategy points they would bring to the table.

I have to say with the current climate, all signs are pointing to Wes Clark. This election is shaping up to be about security and Iraq, and no one can top Clark on that respect. He would nearly inoculate John Kerry from "weak on defense" attacks, brings high military experience to the ticket, and has proven to have the ability to set the grassroots afire. His primary campaign was a stinker, but this is a whole new ballgame. Not only do we have a chance, many prominent voices are now coming out and saying this thing is ours to lose. Donna Brazile, Al Gore's 2000 campaign manager and DNC voting rights go to girl, had this to say about Clark's chances in the race:

"He's had a consistent position on the war, opposing it under the conditions and circumstances in which it was launched...He looks like a sage when you reflect back on what he said and where we are."

I like his chances too. If this is the real short list, General Clark is where I would hedge my bets, as well as my hopes at this point.

That said, any of these five guys would please me. I'm almost glad Bayh isn't on this list. Either Gephardt or Graham would be the ultimate bizarro Cheney pick, Vilsack is the up and comer from a swing state, and Edwards is the proven campaigner. On the downside for these guys, Gephardt and Graham are about as interesting as oh, Dick Cheney, and could prove a liability for someone with a perceived personality problem ala Kerry, Vilsack has no name recognition, and Edwards could potentially outshine Kerry on the campaign trail, as well as have his own ambitions for the job. We'll find out in the next few weeks. Folks, it's getting exciting.

We've gone and started a debate.

I think that Wes Clark's Deaniac appeal would actually bring in quite a few of those Dean folks that are still disenfranchised, and think Kerry is a bit too insidery. I remember myself dreaming of a Dean/Clark or Clark/Dean ticket a few months back, and those sentiments are shared by quite a few.

I think in the light of recent events, the Michael Moore thing wouldn't hold as much ground, if any at all. I think people gained from Moore's Clark excitement was probably less than people annoyed by it, and certainly, anyone that is already voting for John Kerry isn't likely to switch after a VP slot, so it almost seems as if it's nothing to lose, everything to gain. Moore's radical appeal is actually a plus considering Wes himself has something of a centrist populist thing going, and an appeal to independent voters.

I agree that he probably would bring Arkansas even without the VP slot, but the defense and national security credentials, hell, no one comes close.

His weakness that you point out, is that he can sometimes be a poor politician. His performance on MTP, as well as his substantially poor primary campaign go to show this. All that said, I don't think it's anything that can't be hammered out by an experienced staff, and it's head and shoulders above the weaknesses brought by the other top tier candidates.

Sam Nunn, however, would be a good choice as well. His problem though as I see it is his lack of name recognition, and a guy that goes for the center rather than energizes the base. As I mentioned long ago (what, last week?) when you threw his name out in the comments section, a DLC candidate doesn't really inspire me, but my vote was decided a while back, so does that really matter?

Barack Obama, an up and coming face in the Democratic party and candidate for Senate in Illinois has opened a substantial lead against likely Republican challenger, Jack Ryan.

This guy has Dean appeal, and a great stance on the issues to boot. Kos ranks this as our most likely seat to win this year, so let's juice him up a little, or if you are from that great state, volunteer.

John Zogby is one of a few voices to come out and say it: This election has become John Kerry's to lose. With George Bush and company pretty much unable to attack lately, the economy still as the top concern (see more people believe today that the economy is worse off than before Friday's supposedly great job numbers), and poor poll numbers for an incumbent President, not to mention a frozen electorate and this little gem from Charlie Cook:

"it has long been argued that when a president is seeking re-election, it is more of a referendum on the incumbent than a contest between two candidates. If that is the case, Bush is in deep trouble."

I agree with Mr. Zogby on one major point. The electorate is pretty solid right now, and John Kerry has all the room to move up. The electorate knows George Bush, but they are just having their first beer with the good Senator in the last few weeks. John Kerry can expect a jump with his VP announcement, a jump with the Democratic National Convention, and a steady increase with every day more voters get to know him, or become engaged in the race. George Bush only has the convention. He meanwhile has nowhere to go but down, as Iraq descends into hell, the perception of a bad economy continues to be ruminated upon by an already nervous and frightened electorate. Not a whole hell of a lot of people like George Bush. Not a whole lot of people know John Kerry. One of those can be easily corrected, and I ask you, which would you rather be then?

Earlier today, I posted that my money was on a Kerry/Clark or Kerry/Bayh ticket, but my heart was on Kerry/Dean. Since that last one is NOT going to happen, let me tell you why I think Wes Clark is the best man for the job.

I must be forthcoming, when Wes Clark entered the race, I was captivated enough to leave blog for america for a few minutes. I had always sat on the line between supporting Dean or Clark, and I think that a lot of people were in that boat with me. Wes Clark brings Howard Dean's popularity and his connection with young people to the table, without Dean's "Northeastern Angry Liberal" label, plus the added bonus of national security credentials. While Dean is from Vermont, likely as blue as it gets, Wes Clark is from Arkansas, a crucial swing state this year. He has face recognition over Evan Bayh or Tom Vilsack, and could take on Cheney much better than Edwards or Gephardt. As I see it, Wes Clark is not only the man for the job, taking him would be like maximizing the good from the rest of the short list, and minimizing the bad.

Folks, Haloscan seems to be having a few problems today, so please bear with us if the comments link isn't appearing for you. Try refreshing. If the site is loading extraordinarily slow, this is why. I would just take it down, but it is my favorite part of doing this site, to come and read the comments. That, and when it goes down, it only seems to be for a few minutes. OH, and you all can use my new "Blogroll Us" link at the end of every post to add us to your own site's blogroll. Unless your site is total crap (or any one of totalcrap.com's subsidiaries), we'll probably link back to you.

Goddard has an article commenting on Iowa Governator Tom Vilsack as a front runner for John Kerry's VP slot. They see in him a Midwestern, popular, swing state, new face governor with lots of future potential.

I think that he might actually be a better choice than Edwards because, while the good Senator is also from a swing state and a new face with lots of potential, John Edwards has a good chance of outshining John Kerry, and will have a hard time turning his optimistic campaign into attack dog mode, which is where we need a VP to be at. Edwards should replace Ashcroft instead.

In other VP news, Wes Clark has endorsed New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson for the job. While this may seem strange on the surface, it seems that this was only a power play to move himself into top position for the job, as Richardson is seen as a second tier candidate for the job.

The rankings as I see them right now:

First Tier: Gephardt, Vilsack, Clark, Bayh
Teetering: John Edwards (fan favorite)

Anyone outside of this small circle would be a surprise at this point. My money is on Bayh or Clark. My heart is still on Dean, but the only time his name came up from the Kerry VP staff was reading "Worse than Watergate." Hell, I think I'm the only blogger even bringing it up.

..
Note to all Blogger Users: Stick with Haloscan until they iron out some of the problems with their comment system.

Mark Adams, welcome aboard. Progressive Perspectives from all three of our names is too damn long for the site line name, so it's now "Progressive Perspectives from voters in swing states that decided a long time ago which side they would be on, and are now trying to convince others why they are for the most part correct in their assertions of why the Bush administration is bad for our country, it's people, and the world around us."

This week in the Left Times...

Nancy Reagan supports stem cell research?
Well of course she does, but now that it's making it's rounds in news circuits, how will Bush's Christian right pandering team respond?

Will the polls begin to shift toward John Kerry?
George Bush's bubble can remain only so long. Is Kerry going to make national service a campaign theme?
Is VP time getting any closer?


Has the Iraq Prison scandal caused Bush any damage to his campaign? Or does the buck stop with Rumsfeld?
How is the media spinning this? Look for some more solid movement on this one this week from the administration.

This Yahoo/AP article has Bush and Kerry tied at 205 electoral votes each, with 138 in play.

Those 12 remaining states, although not expressed exactly in the article, are probably mostly good news for Kerry, as Independents traditionally break for the challenger, even when the incumbent is not as scandalous, polarizing, and moronic as George Bush.

The real gem buried in this article is:

"I don't think a Massachusetts liberal is going to carry Louisiana," said Jim Duffy, a Democratic strategist from Washington.

Apparently even the Democratic Strategists are pushing Bush MEME's now. What the hell is this about?

UPDATE: A more numbers based article on the same story came out with the 12 battleground states. They are Arkansas (6), Florida (27), Iowa (7), Maine (4), Missouri (11), Nevada (5), New Hampshire (4), New Mexico (5), Ohio (20), Oregon (7) Pennsylvania (21), Washington state (11). If the election were held today, I would see Kerry getting the holy trinity (FL, PA, OH) as well as Oregon, Washington, Maine, Iowa, New Hampshire and probably Missouri. Bush would probably get New Mexico, Arkansas and Nevada. What do I base this on, you ask? Other than the part I mentioned above about Independents breaking to the challenger, Washington, Oregon, and Maine tend to get solid blue as an election nears. PA has trended blue in the last few elections, and has a higher voter registration of Dems. Not to mention, along with Ohio, being hard hit by Bush job losses. New Hampshire is trending Blue right now, and I have a feeling we may see a bit of a backlash on Bush in Florida, from folks still angry from 2000.

In a great move, John Kerry is capitalizing on a huge hole in the President's armor, his ignorance to the situation in Iraq. This puts John Kerry in a good position to be a correct alternative to Bush, as simple as it sounds. I think that because of this, we will begin to see our first significant poll shifts.

People complain about the lack of poll shifts, but my previous post aside: John Kerry is using a long term strategy to paint small strokes here and there to have the full picture available when people start paying attention. Most people don't know of him yet, but they will soon. What is helping Kerry's strategy, which I'm sure he didn't account for, was that President Bush would be shooting himself in the foot every few days.

To paraphrase Bill Maher, Karl Rove isn't the most savvy guy. Anyone who lets their guy try to dodge responsibility by claiming ignorance in the top office..ah hell the top office in the world, isn't the brainiest. Look for things like this to add up real soon.

The call for Rumsfeld's ouster gets louder. This is a lose lose position for Bush. If Rummy goes, people will wonder how Bush picked such a moron in the first place. If Rummy stays, people will wonder how much worse it will get, and just how ignorant he is. Like I've said, id rather see Rummy as one of those jobless statistics, but either way, it doesn't look good for W.

Strangely this only happened on two posts as far as I can see, but a few links were lost in the process of spell checking or posting..Blogger has been acting a bit funny lately. At any rate, to the best of my memory, here are the links. I'm not linking to the original story, because since that post, things have changed, so here are links back to the full sites.

Atrios
EPluribusUnum
Blog For America
Pandagon
Political Wire

It's happening again.

Two questions..Why did I never hear of this until I read Michael Moore's Stupid White Men? Second, Why did they wait four years to make this news?

Ok, a third question..Are we going to let them get away with it again?

It isn't the purging of felon voters that bothers me. In 2000, a supposed glitch caused several voters with names similar to felons (READ: AFRICAN AMERICAN [READ: GORE VOTES]) were also purged. No one made any noise about this at all when it mattered. Florida, for those with short attention spans, was THE swing state in 2000, and went red by a little more than 500 votes. That is a world changing vote my friends, and no one mentioned that little detail with the illegal purging and biased counting. Was I the only one watching TV in 2000 when W expressed surprise that Florida was called for Gore earlier in the night? I really am not one for conspiracy, but this is damn suspicious. With something as important as a Presidential Election, I would hope that everything every state is doing in regards to voting is under an electron microscope. Democrat or Republican, it doesn't matter. If you are legally allowed to vote, your vote should count, right?

Well the title of this post is misleading, because unlike the Yahoo people want you to think, there will not be a major Nader factor this time around.

He might poll high (relatively), but what a person says to a robocall and which lever (or touch screen area) they pull (press) in November are two completely different things. Barring a miracle, Nader will get no more than 2 percent this time around, probably much less than that. He will not have an effect on this election, as some people worry. Should we just ignore him then? No, actually. A big reason that Nader will not be a factor is because quite a few of his supporters hate GW more than they love ol' Ralph, as opposed to like Kerry more than Ralph. This translates into cold feet in November, but in the meantime, we should embrace some of his ideas that wouldn't completely kill the Clintonism that John Kerry is trying to channel, such as a bigger hike in the minimum wage. People by and large support this measure, and John Kerry could run with it. This, and any number of issues that Kerry and Nader already agree on could be pushed from Kerry, making the Nader break vote less guilty, and shoring up the Democratic base in the mean time.

Kerry's main problem with these people is not on the issues, it is an image problem. I'll admit, back in the day when I was a rabid Deaniac, I thought Kerry was a slimeball. I think there are quite a few people that still feel that way, and while most will hold their nose and vote for him anyway, the people that are disenfranchised will probably have more of an effect than Nader himself. I did my research, followed Kerry stories, looked at his record, heard him speak, and began to replace my Bush hate with Kerry love. This man will be a great President, the problem is convincing the base of that fact.

This really isn't a choice between two evils, as some would seem to believe. If John Kerry's record ran with John Edwards personality and Howard Dean's fire, the polls would be something like 90-10. While it's a shame that personality matters that much more than actual issues for someone running a powerful country, it is the awful truth. I'm not real worried anyway, as Bush has been sinking himself lately while Kerry waits in the wings, but I would love to see the people on my side be more proud of their candidate. He really is a good guy.

Some poll action for yall.

Fox News National Poll(source)
Bush 44 - approval 49
Kerry 41

Gallup National Poll (source)
Bush 48
Kerry 49

Bush 47
Kerry 47
Nader 3

These are within the margin of error. Alan "chapter on why Fox News is A'OK" Colmes, it always seems to me that the Fox News polls are slightly skewed in a certain direction compared to other polls.

Arizona Star state poll (source)
Bush 46
Kerry 42


What that state poll doesn't show is that the President's approval numbers have sunk to a new low. Look for some movement after the Kerry ad blitz begins to sink in.

Rasmussen also has some encouraging numbers, with Kerry ahead in Wisconsin, Oregon, California, Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Washington, Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, and Illinois. Well within striking distance of some others as well. The national tracking poll there, however, has slipped back into a dead heat.

What these numbers show me, and I know I pick on these unnamed Dems a lot, is that those unnamed Dems are full of shit. We're doing great by almost any standard, and Bush is running scared. We've got the energy, the excitement, and something the elephants didn't expect, the money to win this thing. Now that the message is getting out there, the numbers should begin to reflect a good shift for Kerry.

Arianna Huffington has an interesting new blog post about how John Kerry should go about winning.

While it would be a dream of mine for John Kerry to become a "hedgehog" candidate with some balls out progressiveness, I don't think this will happen. I don't know that it would be the best strategy either..any move to the left would yield ground in the center for GWB, and the center isn't really happy with him right now.

What Ms. Huffington is saying is that if we are to outrun the flip flop label, we can't flip flop. I think this is a problem more with the media coverage than any actual issue, as John Kerry has been rather consistent with his voting record. The media however seems to have a need to make a story out of semantics, as in the medal/ribbon story. How do we then address the problem? I see no problem with John Kerry's continuing outfoxal of the President, but here's what we can do: George Bush is running with so many holes in his own record, let's turn the table around and put him on the defensive. Let's take a look at his record. Remember that Kyoto treaty? Remember mercury standards in drinking water? I could go on and on..and actually have at the old blog, but I won't here, the point is that George Bush has done some things that would scare the rightest of the right, and has gotten a free pass on most of them. Let's raise those issues, and show who the real flip flopper is when it comes to rhetoric and action.

This got buried under the Iraq abuse controversy, but a good step for Kerry none the less.

"I believe we need to offer teachers more pay, more training, more career choices and more options for education, and we must ask more in return," Kerry was quoted as saying, addressing questions on his education program. I for one think that this is the way to go, rather than the NCLB's focus on the student. It's trickle down education. The better the teacher, the better the student, the better future teachers, nay, the better our future.

Senator Kerry's plan calls for an extra 30 billion dollars to education over the next ten years as incentive to recruit the best teachers in the higher need areas. Honestly, I would take the next step, and socialize education, but you all know me, I'm not running for office.

It's a shame to say, but you don't hear much about education anymore. Iraq dominates the news cycle, and probably rightfully so, but that doesn't lessen the importance of education. It shouldn't be AN issue, it should be THE issue. John Kerry should make this a campaign theme, and expose the shortcomings of the "Education President." How long can the President get away with underfunding one of his keynote programs while pushing for more tax cuts and breaks? To borrow a line...BRING IT ON.

While I know that I have refrained from commenting on the prison abuse scandal in Iraq, I think now is the time to chime in.

There has been a lot of talk lately of the end of Rumsfeld, but let me put it out there: I don't think he should resign. Yet. He needs to take control and responsibility for what is happening, but the fall is not his at this moment. You know the proverbial stuff has hit the fan when even President Bush is apologizing.

While it is a shame that the leaders of our country seemed to be the last ones to find out about this scandal, it doesn't seem to me that there is much they could have done to prevent this from happening. I think we should be less focused on the abuse and more on the fact that there seems to be a problem in the chain of command when 60 minutes 2 finds out before the commander in chief. That is not to say that I think what happened or is happening over there is ok, it's far from it. It is reprehensible, and may have topped Bush's decision to go there on the all time "Why the world hates America" list. Our little problem in the Middle East just got bigger, and it is going to take a while to repair the damage done here at home and abroad. It was precisely things of this nature that turned Vietnam to shit. Let's hope against hope that the same thing doesn't transpire here.


UPDATE: I thought about this some more, and to hell with it, let him fry. Rumsfeld and while I'm at it, the entire Bush team needs to resign. The reverse midas touch has got to go.

People may have noticed something of a trend in those Presidential opinion polls you hear so much about. Something along the lines of every poll is the same, and within the margin of error. With Bush facing a new scandal nearly every week, how is that even possible? Richard Clarke, Bob Woodward, Iraq, etc.. it because John Kerry hasn't stepped up to the plate? No, actually.

While Senator Kerry has been quietly preparing his strategy and making some key decisions about the direction of his campaign, he has effectively removed himself from the action. Not to mention raising a load of money, every penny of which will be necessary. While he has done this, he has been on the ground on a near non stop schedule, delivering speeches, holding town hall meetings, and really meeting the people. He will criticize Bush only to show how he can do better. All that said, we will likely OWN the news cycle when John Kerry announces his running mate (Fingers still crossed for Howard Dean style pick, not Gephardt style pick)

Bush meanwhile is on the defensive. Slipping approval numbers aside though, the actual selection poll hasn't moved too much out of his favor. The dirty truth here folks isn't Kerry's shortcoming, but rather Bush's biggest strength, and only area he can rely on.

I work with someone who is an unabashed Bush lover. She has a family of five, lower middle class. While she knows that politically, she doesn't support George Bush's ideas, probably would not support war, she would vote for him against anyone because "he is the most godly President we have ever had. He knows the bible!" It is this person that is the archetype of hard Bush support. George W. Augustus Bush can do no wrong in the eyes of the church. It's these people that are likely getting hurt the most economically, that would drop dead for Bush if he asked, just to fill their own socially conservative agenda. Bush has this market cornered like Microsoft.

What can we do? Well dirty truth number 2 is that we probably won't be able to do much to convert these people, unless W abandoned the church and returned to coke..publicly. Since that isn't going to happen, here's what we can do. John Kerry actually has a base of people who are likely just as rabid, which is why his numbers haven't moved either. All we need to do to win this election is shore up that base, and keep it energized. I'm going to plug Howard Dean or a lesser extent, Wes Clark for VP here just because its my post and I can. Don't worry about or chastise Ralph Nader, embrace his ideas and his supporters, make it pointless for him to run.

The final dirty secret of the poll numbers are that independents and swing voters by and large are A) not fans of W, and B) likely to break for the challenger in November. We can see this trend already. While George Bush has been gaining ground in states he would already have won, John Kerry is now (according to Rasmussen) ahead in Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Which is more important? To this extent, the national polls aren't all that static, just moving around in different places and more or less neutralizing each other. As any liberal blogger will remind you, the national numbers are useless when the electoral college is in play. Look at Albert 2000. So then, aren't we doing just what we should be doing?

I have been waiting since last January to see a major story that not only addresses our chances at winning this thing, but the possibly of a blowout, our way.
(full article here)

This article is spot on. Ideologies aside, Bush's situation is looking a lot similar to Carter in 1980. Bush's approval numbers are showing a downward trend. He is dealing with a crisis that is quickly spinning into chaos. His economic recovery..isn't really recovering as they had hoped. The American public is beginning to see George Bush as a miserable failure. (I'm sorry, I couldn't resist)

Where does that leave us? While quite a few people are whining that Senator Kerry hasn't done enough to capitalize on this situation, I think we have the right idea. While your opponent is shooting himself in the foot, you stand off to the side and give a program on gun safety. Alright, the analogies don't work too well after 1 am, but give me a break.
There is a real opportunity for us to win this one in a landslide. What these polls that we hear so much about are not showing is an increasing distaste for George Bush. This distaste alone has probably registered more votes than Russell Simmons this year. What about generally Republican voters who have lost their job? What about that voter's generally Republican families? How about the military families?

The only people George Bush can count on at this point are people that benefit from his policies (read: rich rich rich), and people with such backward social thinking that they don't realize they are being raped. Senator Kerry can keep it this way.

Well folks, It seems they don't want to count em after all.

A new election commission today decided that we can not force any kind of checks and balances on precincts that use the dreaded touch screen voting machines.

What this means in common language is that there will be no receipt for your vote. No way to tell if it was counted properly. No way to count it again if a problem arises. With the election looking to be pretty damn close, I think it would be rather prudent to have these paper records. If they already had glitches with the system for primary votes (CA), just think of how disastrous this could be if we have a Florida repeat.

We've seen how fast Congress can act with an entire nation's nudge. The do not call list has shown us that. We as a nation should get behind the initiative for e-voting standards, including testing, bug proofing, and mainly, paper records. Don't get me wrong, E-voting is a great thing. It makes the process easier, and has the potential to attract many new voters to the game. That said, however, would you trust your computer with a decision that important? Or would you get the blue screen of death? Democrats, Republicans, Greens, Bull Moose..every one of us should stand up and say it with me now: Our vote will count.

I have cleaned up the html in here a little bit, it had become quite messy over the last month. I also switched our blog links to blogrolling, which should keep things tidy, and make it easier for me to add as i go. People that use blogrolling can click on the very first blog link, "blogroll us!" to add our site to your blogroll instantly. I would appreciate anyone that did that.

Support the Cause: Evolution debuts soon.

If they didn't learn from Fox News' Franken fiasco, they will now..you just gave Moore some free publicity.

Disney is attempting to block subsidiary Miramax from distributing Michael Moore's latest documentary, Fahrenheit 911, which details the Bush relation to the Bin Laden family over the years.

Congrats Mike, on the sure success and free publicity Disney just granted you today.

I thought it was another one of those unnamed Democrats saying Kerry was off to a bad start, but this time, it's the writer of "Rewriting History," a so called rebuttal to Hillary's book. On top of this guy being a jackass, who the hell is he to say we're off to a bad start? I've addressed this before: If a bad start puts us even or ahead in the polls, and winning the election if it were held today (Rasmussen), then yeah, that must be a bad start.

Goddard has the article here.

Hopefully we can be doing this bad in November.

Hello all, tonight is the final night for er...finals for myself, so I will probably not be updating until late tonight, after a dinner party thing.

Thanks to everyone who responded to the new writer post opening. I am impressed by the response. Due to the volume, I am going to have to now make it a stipulation that you already have a blog so that I can look at your posting habits and writing style. I will have a new writer or two, plus maybe a few guest spots, very soon.

Anyways, everyone have a good day, we'll chit chat tonight.

I haven't touched this one since we were at the old blog, but it has gone and come back!

As it turns out, Bush administration officials were WRONG to withhold the true cost of their Medicare bill from congress. They needed a nonpartisan commission to tell them this? To top it all off they "probably violated the law."

Will this one stick? I've asked it before and I'll ask again, can Bush put up with a new scandal every other day?

Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware has officially been name checked by the media as under consideration for Kerry VP.

Political Wire has the story here.

Biden is another establishment candidate, a la Gephardt, who I don't necessarily agree with. People keep reminding us that this election is about activating the base, so I would think that it would be best to choose a Dean Democrat, not one who has more appeal in the crossover sector. A Dean or Clark, who unlike Dean, is actually being vetted by the Kerry campaign for consideration, would energize the base and pull votes back from Nader. Why then, is the so called establishment pushing for Gep or Biden?

It honestly doesn't matter to me who he picks, John Kerry has had my vote since November 2000. That said, I would love to see something exciting here, and not just another Cheney type pick. Let's look at someone to groom for 2012.

On Yahoo headlines right now:

"Iraq tops worst places to be a reporter"

Apparently the SNL weekend update people are writing the headlines at yahoo now.

The only poll (excluding zogby) that I still trust has dropped some results.

It's some pretty encouraging stuff, should silence the Kerry doubters, and this is even before the new ad campaign begins. Notice Kerry ahead in PA (yesss), OH, and FL. Good work.

John Kerry today launched what is said by many to be the most expensive ad blitz of all time. While not coming close to George Bush in total dollars spent, sources say that this is the most expensive AD buy in a political campaign. Kerry saturated the entire swing state market, along with Colorado and Louisiana with his new positive biographical ads, in an attempt to step up after Bush's early attempts to define him failed. Look for the result of this to be our first poll movement outside of the margin of error.

This is good news for the quelling of supposed Dems that are worried Kerry has been silent. I don't see it actually, he took a week off and has been on the campaign trail ever since..what the hell are these people talking about? Hell, I even got to see him speak during this "silent spring."

John Kerry is pissing off a few people who don't understand this new campaign. Students are interested, the internet will play a big factor..it's not all about TV time anymore. I say continue what you are doing. After Bush's load has dried, we're still tied. And no, I didn't plan that to rhyme.

I applaud the effort here from ex conservative David Brock (Blinded by the Right) to form a media watchdog group to debunk unsubstantiated attacks on the left (mediamatters.org), however, we need something like this that is going to preach to more than the choir. This is fodder for the liberal blogosphere, but when it really counts, who is going to be converted by something like this? I would like to see something that is coming from an unbiased stance and debunking all of the crap we are fed on the news networks. It would ooze credibility, and perhaps convert some people along the way. Until then, how can we go about our work when people can easily call this source a liberal shill?

and adding one or two more writers.

Anyone interested should email me here.

A proper knowledge of Blogger, which is pretty easy to use, and an obsession with following politics and ousting GW are necessary. It is best if you already have a blog for me to check out your writing style. If brought on, you will also be involved in site promotion. The guidelines for posts are not very restraining, but I'm getting ahead of myself. Anyone interested email me at info@lefttimes.com, or leave a comment on this post.

was right.

The Plame scandal is about to erupt. How much longer can Bush keep up with a weekly scandal?

Folks, head over to Democracy for America. This will be the reason for our long term success. Howard Dean and company have done more for our chances this year than even John Kerry, and he is going a long way to saving the party in the long term. Check it out, volunteer, contribute if you can. This is good stuff.

Kerry/??? 04!

All signs are pointing to a Kerry running mate selection by the end of this month. Expect more speculation, more names, and more clues to drop this week. I have said all along that it is important to do this early to have a top surrogate to handle attacks while Senator Kerry defines himself. The Left Times' official prediction? I'm going to have to limp out and say I can't pick one favorite, but the three names that I see popping up and the reasons for such are Gephardt (strategy), Vilsack (swing state, up and comer), and Edwards (fan favorite.) I would put my money on one of those three, but there are a plethora of outsider picks as well. Who would I actually want to see you ask? For my own selfish reasons, Kerry/Dean would be my dream ticket, but this hasn't even been dropped by the craziest of commentators. Strategically, however, and it pains me to say this, but Gep would probably be the best. Kerry doesn't really have to worry about me and my league of voters, we'd support a cabbage for VP if there was a D beside his name. We need to look at the swing voter.

More Doubts about Kerry from supposed Democratic Party insiders
I'm not sure where these stories are coming from, but I don't know why anyone is worrying at this point. Kerry is doing a fine job, and it shows, the polls are dead even. We've even erased most of the Bush monetary advantage, and let's face it, that is all they had to run on. If this becomes about issues, we're in folks. Stop your bitching! No one but political junkies are paying attention yet.

A new book for Bush to read
Yes, the outed CIA agent book is coming out. Look for a firestorm of coverage.

Finally, on the site
Support the Cause version 2 debuts with support for those of us who are broke, as well as an expanded list of areas to contribute for those of us who aren't. A new Kerry incentive program will be announced as well, and for those of you who participated on the old blog, I haven't forgot about you. The stickers are in, and I will be emailing all of you this week. Anyone waiting to contribute to the Kerry Core until we announce the incentives, go ahead and donate. All incentives will be retroactive to...right now. With school for me all finished on Tuesday, I will be able to finish up all of the sites and hopefully grow and promote more actively, as well as, of course, returning to the normal posting frequency. Thanks everyone for sticking with us through the last week or so during my finals.