Just discovered this FREAKING HILARIOUS Samantha Bee bit from last year’s Republican National Convention…check out her Bristol Palin impression, it’s insanely funny…

The above image comes from a ridiculous interview with Palin by John Ziegler, a right-wing buffoon who is making an unintentional self-mockumentary about how the Republicans would’ve won if only the self-hating corporate media (who McCain described as his base) hadn’t been so — get this straight — biased in favor of Obama.  (Yep, those corporations would do just about anything rather than serve their own self-interest.)  This is the same John Ziegler who did an incredibly biased poll that Zogby, to its shame, signed off on, and then cussed out Nate Silver when the latter interviewed him about it.  Even with the laughably softball questions Ziegler lobs her, Palin barely manages to stay coherent.  She’s certainly color-coordinated, though.  Cute boots.

When the 2008 election threatened to embarrass the right out of its usual endless gloating, endangering their well-rehearsed lines about how “America” really agrees with them so get over it, they had to strike back somehow. Accordingly, right-wing newsmax.com came up with a county map purporting to show that “America Is Still a ‘Red’ Nation.”

Map 1

Well, I’ve been playing around on the New York Time’s wonderful “Electoral Explorer” page, and I’ve discovered something very interesting. The red America you see above isn’t the real America.

First of all, let’s take a look at a better, more nuanced county map that uses shades of blue or red to show how strongly Democratic or Republican particular counties are, courtesy of the Electoral Explorer.

Map 2

Except, this isn’t the whole country. It isn’t even the real country. As you may notice, certain areas are blank. Those are the counties with at least 200 people per square mile. The map above only gives the more thinly populated counties with under 200 people per square mile, and, as you can see, while Obama carried some of them (in blue), McCain won these counties overall, 56-43%.

Here are the other, more densely populated counties, where Obama won by a nearly identical margin of 57-42%:

Map 3

You might well wonder, with these mirror-image results, how Obama wound up with a decisive victory. Map 3, above, looks like just a few counties strewn all over the place, while Map 2 looks like the vast majority of the nation.

Well, that’s the funny thing. The counties on Map 2 are actually only 30% of the electorate, and a similar share of the population. Those few-and-far between counties on Map 3 are 70%.

This isn’t Abraham Lincoln’s America any more. The population today is very urbanized and concentrated. That doesn’t mean we’re all crammed into one corner of the country. We now have big cities all over the place, not just in the north-central/northeastern corridor the way it used to be. The 70% includes urbanized counties in all but four states (Alaska, North Dakota, Montana, and Wyoming, all won by McCain, by the way). It’s also true that many counties within the 70% are suburbs rather than “inner cities.” Mind you, we’re talking the inner suburbs—densely populated areas that tend to cluster closely around large cities, not far-flung exurbs. Other 70-percenter counties contain smaller but significant “inner cities.” Even in Kansas, a state many think of as the essence of rural America, the five Map 3 counties (all in the Kansas City, Topeka, and Wichita areas) contain 54% of the electorate! Out of such components—along with more obvious ones, like the Northeastern Megapolis—is made up the 70%.

This 70% of the population, dense but scattered all over the country, is the real America. The thinly populated 30%, where McCain won, is the not-real, not-truly American America—you know, the people who just have to be different, who can’t or won’t fit in with ordinary folks. We’re talking rednecks and yahoos, hicks and evangelicals—people who, instead of playing basketball like regular people, bowl and watch NASCAR. These are people with such an itch to do their own thing, they eat at Applebee’s instead of an arugula-dominated salad bar, drive SUV’s instead of hybrids, and have unwholesome small-town values instead of urban sophistication.

Okay, before I offend anyone, let me make this clear. I don’t really believe any of what I just said. I take it for granted that every part of this country is the real America, and I certainly don’t believe in the silly stereotypes I’ve just enumerated. I’m just making a satirical point here.

Read the rest of this entry »

I’m normally not much for photo-essays, but please do see Callie Shell’s awesome pics of Obama and family in Time, of which this (without the text) is only won…uh, one.

What with annoying little details like having the last two presidential elections brazenly stolen by a right-wing lunatic, election-watching has gotten to be a nerve-wracking pastime for progressives. There are still huge, justifiable concerns about the integrity of our elections. Still, it has to be said that things are looking a lot better this time around. People say, “We thought Gore and Kerry had it in the bag, too,” but the truth is, Gore and Kerry never had it in the bag. If there had been honest vote-counts, they would both, in my opinion, have won, but only by pulling out a close election in the last day or so. If you don’t believe me, check out this graph.

It’s possible Obama could have the election effectively won very early on election night. Alternately, we could be in a for a long night and short fingernails. However, you have to know what to look for (or else leave yourself at the mercy of biased and woodenheaded corporate media pundits). Even if Obama wins decisively, he probably won’t officially clinch the 270 electors needed until the polls close in the Pacific at 11 o’clock Eastern time. At that time, California, Oregon, Washington, and Hawaii will all finish voting—and their 77 electors are in the bag for Obama, meaning he only needs to have 193 electors at 10:59 to be assured of victory a minute later. Read the rest of this entry »

My sentiments exactly…

Hillary will probably win in Pennsylvania, but probably not by nearly big enough of a margin to enable her to mount a comeback and win the popular vote, let alone the pledged delegates. But remember this, as the results roll in: for her, this has ceased to be primarily about winning the people’s votes.

In boxing, when you win a round, you normally gain one point on your opponent. So what does a boxer do if he figures he’s behind by more points than there are rounds to go? Theoretically, he could try for two-point rounds: if you really smashingly dominate a round, once in a blue moon you’ll be given two points instead of one. But the chances of doing this in more than one round are negligible.

So what does he do? He stops trying to win on points. He puts all his hopes on a knockout.

It’s been evident for some time now that Hillary Clinton is in similar straits. People have long since pointed out that she has no practical chance to win the pledged delegates count. Instead, they’ve argued, she could win the national popular vote compiled from all the primaries and caucuses, and make the case that this represents the true will of the people, which the superdelegates should honor.

Horsepucky. She’s not winning the national popular vote. Bloomberg.com, in an article that expresses skepticism about her prospects of doing it, but not enough skepticism, remarks that

Clinton would need a 25-point victory in Pennsylvania, plus 20-point wins in later contests in West Virginia, Kentucky and Puerto Rico. Even that scenario assumes Clinton, 60, would break even in Indiana, North Carolina, South Dakota, Montana and Oregon — a prospect that’s not at all certain.

It’s not just not at all certain, it’s very unlikely. Indiana is uncertain. North Carolina, South Dakota, Montana, and Oregon are natural states for big Obama wins, based on the pattern so far. In North Carolina, there are even polls to back this up. It would be miraculous if she broke even cumulatively in those states. For that matter, a 25-point win in Pennsylvania would overturn all the polling that’s been done there lately.

And 20-point wins in West Virginia, Kentucky, and Puerto Rico? Well, she’d need 60% of the vote. So far Hillary’s broken the 60% barrier in only one race–her husband’s home state of Arkansas. Obama, meanwhile, has scored over 60% of the vote in 18 races—15 states plus D.C, Democrats Abroad, and an astounding 90% in the Virgin Islands (where his boyish looks apparently enabled him to pass for a virgin).

In fact, the consistent difference in this otherwise very close race has been precisely Obama’s ability to win some races by big margins. Because the delegates are allocated proportionately in each state, you really need this to build up a lead.

Anyway, for Clinton to get 60% in four of the ten remaining races, when she’s only done it once out of more than forty chances so far, is a pretty gigantic stretch. Obama’s consistently shown the ability to use his combination of cash, appealing T.V. ads, and energized base to put up sizable numbers even where he’s relatively weak.

So Clinton’s not going to win the national popular vote, and she’s not winning the pledged delegates either. If she doesn’t win the pledged delegates, she needs a majority of superdelegates. So far, they’re almost evenly divided, so she has to pick up a sizeable majority of the remaining ones. But, she can’t argue to them that she’s the people’s choice unless she wins either popular votes or pledged delegates.

Quite a dilemma, ain’t it?

However, she is a shrewd and experienced enough practical politician to know that there is, in fact, one possibility still open to her. It’s not exactly likely, but it’s by no means impossible either. And although it depends heavily on events beyond her control, she has been moving heaven and earth to make it happen. (Or hell and earth, depending on your perspective.)

Read the rest of this entry »