If Kerry does decide to run,

[whometense]

he could do a lot worse than hiring Mark Barrett as a consultant. This guy is so smart.

Check out this post: http://thepremise.com/archives/11/09/2006/637

For a sample of what I’m going to be talking a lot about (and ripping to shreds) in the future, read this.

Nowhere in any of the ideological arguments now taking place within and outside the Democratic Party is there any mention of what I call utilitarian politics. Utilitarian politics is the crazy idea — which I subscribe to — that there’s actually a work product to the political process. Not surprisingly, I subscribe to the equally crazy idea that if you deliver a good political work product to a majority of voters, those voters will want to vote for you again.

Take a look around the blogosphere right now and you’ll see conservative Republicans and conservative Democrats arguing with progressives about whether Tuesday’s elections signaled a repudiation of conservatism or not. Why? Because if the left can argue that conservatism has been repudiated they can argue that liberalism and progressivism are being embraced. That’s not necessarily true, of course, but it’s how the game is played by ideologically-driven political advocates.

What you need to be aware of is that this is a game, and a shell game at that. It’s been going on forever, and the people who like it are never going to stop playing it. But that doesn’t mean you have to play along...

[WildEyedLiberal]

1. This guy is gold

Check out this one: http://thepremise.com/archives/11/08/2006/631

I do think, however, that there is at least one Democratic candidate who won yesterday who would not have won if John Kerry hadn’t campaigned on his behalf. That candidate is Patrick Murphy in Pennsylvania’s 8th District, who narrowly defeated incumbent Republican Michael Fitpatrick, by 1,521 votes out of over 250,000 cast. It’s of course possible to argue that Mr. Murphy would have won more handily if John Kerry’s flubbed joke hadn’t been exploited by the Bush administration and the press. But because Mr. Murphy eked out a win it’s not possible to argue that his associations with John Kerry cost him the race.

....

John Kerry stood with Patrick Murphy when he was attacked. He not only helped turn the story around, but he gained critical visibility for Mr. Murphy which blunted the advantage Mr. Fitzpatrick had as an incumbent. It’s not only possible but probable that if John Kerry had not intervened, Republican Incumbent Patrick Fitzgerald would have been able to define Mr. Murphy in a negative light, costing him critical votes in a very narrow election.

Yes, it’s possible that Mr. Murphy would have won without John Kerry’s support. Athough the Republicans clearly tried to discredit Mr. Murphy’s military service as a means of discrediting his candidacy, we’ll never know for sure just what might have happened if Senator Kerry hadn’t intervened. Still, if there’s any race where John Kerry put his own reputation on the line and went to war for another Democrat it was the 8th District in Pennsylvania.

Which Democrats won. By 1,500 votes.

Edit oops wrong link

[whometense]

2. and ANOTHER one

http://thepremise.com/archives/11/09/2006/639

And here’s the most important aspect of all this going forward. If Democrats don’t nominate a presidential candidate who is seen as credible on national security issues and viable as a prospective commander in chief, then we give back all of the gains we just made. All of them. And it will be that much harder to make a credible case for Democratic supremacy on national security in the future.

The 2008 presidential race is going to feature a Republican who is strong on defense. The Democratic Party is going to be feeling good about 2006 and will be sorely tempted to go with a charismatic personality even if that candidate cedes national security to the Republicans. That’s the battleground from here on out.

[MBS]

3. Mark Barrett is wonderful

his blog is my unfailing prescription for blogosphere and MSM nonsense and hysteria.
Plus he has a background in advertising. . (I think that's correct. . )