Chuck Todd On Obama’s Speech
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, Barack, Conventions, Democrats, McCain, Media, VideoHe thought it showed a toughness we haven’t seen yet from the candidate.
Of note, I’ve always thought that Todd is one of the savvier, intellectually honest pundits out there. Perhaps even more so than the late Tim Russert. So something tells me that his will be the consensus opinion come tomorrow.
We shall see…
This entry was posted on Thursday, August 28th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Barack, Conventions, Democrats, McCain, Media, Video. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
August 29th, 2008 at 12:10 am
[...] « Chuck Todd On Obama’s Speech [...]
August 29th, 2008 at 12:10 am
Yeah. I don’t understand why we are even bothering with the election. Just a waste of time and money. Isn’t there some way we can have coronation over the weekend?
August 29th, 2008 at 12:42 am
MW, is there honestly ANYTHING that he could’ve said or done that would’ve improved your opinion of him which has obviously never been high? Or did you just make up your mind when Hillary lost that you hated him so much that you wouldn’t even listen? Because pretty much every single post you make, even the good ones (and there are plenty of those), just make you seem like a bitter whiner.
August 29th, 2008 at 5:14 am
[...] Donklephant Related PostsWhat’s Next For Meet The Press [...]
August 29th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Ah. I see the confusion. Simple misunderstanding. You see, it’s in my job description.
Actually, my problem is less with Obama (who I have written complimentary about, and who I respect as an intellect, speaker, and Bear fan) and more with Obama supporters and their uncritical, unquestioning support of some fairly conventional liberal policies.
I would not even have that much of a problem with the Obama supporters if it were not for what I consider to be a the extremely dangerous government state we are likely to inherit when he wins. We will have a charismatic leader with a large mandate walking into a Cheney designed and expanded unitary executive role, with no meaningful opposition from widely expanded Democratic majorities in either the Senate or House. This will be the greatest concentration of unfettered power in the White House in my lifetime (55 years) and arguably ever in the history of the US. I don’t care if it was Jesus Christ on the ballot, I would work vigorously against that government state.
August 30th, 2008 at 8:24 am
MW has a lot said about misgivings about the “if Obama wins” situ about congress. When Bubba came in, he had a dem congress and they tried to ram a lot through. After 12 Repub presidential years it seemed natural. The country didn’t like it and we ended up with a Repub congress till 06. And we have now!!!! Congressional gridlock on so many issues. The lowest polling on congress and a president since the numbers came off stone. Now euphoria. I don’t want the dems to lick their chops and do too much doo doo when Jan 09 comes. Obama is my guy, but he still can’t walk on water.
And the “SPEECH”!!!!!!!! only a WOW comes to mind.
August 30th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
[...] JG has also expressed his admiration for Chuck Todd as an analyst (something on which we agree), perhaps Chuck’s explanation will be helpful. I [...]
September 1st, 2008 at 11:07 pm
like krabbie said “WOW”. 38 million people at home felt the same way. i think
September 2nd, 2008 at 10:41 pm
MW to me all those things you just said as if they were bad sound like GREAT things… if he gets elected with a majority in the house and senate maybe this country will actually make some forward progress
September 3rd, 2008 at 1:34 am
Well you are a partisan Steeeve. You believe that Democrats are angels and Republicans are devils. There are many partisans like you who feel Republicans are angels and Democrats are devils. You are in good company. I’d guess 80% of the electorate are partisan.
I am not a partisan. I believe in what James Madison wrote in Federalist #51
This was the philosophical framework for the design of our constitution and the rationale for separation of powers with checks and balances. The founders did not anticipate that with a sufficiently strong political party controlling the legislature and the executive, the checks and balances fail. We get bad government. We get government that abuses power. We get corrupt government. And only a partisan can believe that single party democratic government will be any less corrupt, or any less abusive of their power and damaging to the country than single party Republican government was. Check the corruption record of the Democratic congress in the first two years of the Clinton administration. Or just wait. You’ll soon see it again.
And BTW - Read David Mahew’s book “Divided We Govern.” It absolutely debunks the notion that there is any correlation in “something getting done” legislatively and unified single party vs. dividied government.