take your answer off the air...

  • HorsesAss.Org: the straight poop on WA politics & the press
    progressive brilliance from the guy who pointed out Tim Eyman's nascent horse's-assedness
  • Talker's Magazine
    The quirky talk radio trade mag. Check the Talk Radio Research Project- it's not very scientific, but places on the top 15 talkers list (scroll down to Talk Radio Audiences By Size)) are as hotly contested as Emmys (and mean just about as much).
  • The Advocate
    No, not THAT Advocate... it's the Northwest Progressive Institute's Official Blog.
  • Media Matters
    Documentation of right-wing media in video, audio and text.
  • Orcinus
    home of David Neiwert, freelance investigative journalist and author who writes extensively about far-right hate groups
  • Hominid Views
    "People, politics, science, and whatnot" Darryl is a statistician who fights imperialism with empiricism, gives good links and wry commentary.
  • Jesus' General
    An 11 on the Manly Scale of Absolute Gender, a 12 on the Heavenly Scale of the 10 Commandments and a 6 on the earthly scale of the Immaculately Groomed.
  • Howie in Seattle
    Howie Martin is the Abe Linkin' of progressive Seattle.
  • Streaming Radio Guide
    Hellishly long (5795!) list of radio streaming, steaming on the Internets.
  • The Naked Loon
    News satire -- The Onion in the Seattle petunia patch.
  • Irrational Public Radio
    "informs, challenges, soothes and/or berates, and does so with a pleasing vocal cadence and unmatched enunciation. When you listen to IPR, integrity washes over you like lava, with the pleasing familiarity of a medium-roast coffee and a sensible muffin."
  • The Maddow Blog
    Here's the hyper-interactive La Raych of MSNBC. daily show-vids, freakishly geeky research, and classy graphics.
  • Northwest Broadcasters
    The AM, FM, TV and digital broadcasters of Northwest Washington, USA and Southwest British Columbia, Canada. From Kelso, WA to the northern tip of Vancouver Island, BC - call letters, formats, slogans, networks, technical data, and transmitter maps. Plus "recent" news.
  • News Corpse
    The Internet's chronicle of media decay.
  • The Moderate Voice
    The voice of reason in the age of Obama, and the politics of the far-middle.
  • News Hounds
    Dogged dogging of Fox News by a team who seems to watch every minute of the cable channel so you don't have to.
  • HistoryLink
    Fun to read and free encyclopedia of Washington State history. Founded by the late Walt Crowley, it's an indispensable tool and entertainment source for history wonks and surfers alike.

right-wing blogs we like

  • The Reagan Wing
    Hearin lies the real heart of Washington State Republicans. Doug Parris runs this red-meat social conservative group site which bars no holds when it comes to saying who they are and who they're not; what they believe and what they don't; who their friends are and where the rest of the Republicans can go. Well-written, and flaming.
  • Orbusmax
    inexhaustible Drudgery of NW conservative news
  • The Radio Equalizer
    prolific former Seattle KVI, KIRO talk host speaks authoritatively about radio.
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 02/2005


« Rush limbaugh losing stations, ground, weight, girth, his girlfriend, his self-worth, his place in line at krispy kremes | Main | Rabbi daniel lapin falls on hard times... »

March 16, 2006



Everyone conveniently ignores the point: Olberman is gaining share while O'Reilly is losing share. Attack all you want with your fanciful points of view, the facts are the facts. Sorry Oreilly fan.


Nope, O'reilly fan...this whole argument reminds me of third graders who are fighting over who gets to be first in line and be the door holder....

Carry on, by all means.

joanie for KS

KS: What do you think of your republican prognosticator now:

"" . . . A stronger Republican Party, he (Keving Phillips) believed, would restore stability and order to a society experiencing disorienting and at times violent change. . .

(but) No longer does he see Republican government as a source of stability and order. Instead, he presents a nightmarish vision of ideological extremism, catastrophic fiscal irresponsibility, rampant greed and dangerous shortsightedness."

. . . "American Theocracy" may be the most alarming analysis of where we are and where we may be going to have appeared in many years . . . it is extensively researched and for the most part frighteningly persuasive.

According to the article, his insights were right on in the late sixties and seventies. Do you think his current analysis is credible?


The Adventures of Backwoods Boze,and the Cocky Little Twerp-Sytman and Boze were discussing the movie V for Vendetta on friday. They were quite alarmed since they thought,in their simplistic fashion that the masked terrorist/vigilante character in the film was somehow a veiled representation of a Muslim terrorist. The film presents a totalitarian "Christian fascist" state in futuristic Britain. They seemed worried that the film would lead people to view Muslim terrorists in a favorable light, something only the "twins" would think up.The masked fellow in the movie is simply a man with a vendetta and hatred for the fascist government, who resorts to vigilanteism and bombings. They normally would have had "Litterman" (Michael Medved) on to talk about the movie, but he was unavailable, so they had to resort to bringing in KIRO's LIBERAL movie critic Tom Tangly. Tom tried his best to disabuse them of their misguided conceptions and ideas about the movie, with questionable results. Boze protested the idea of a "Christian fascist" state,saying that this was an anoxymoron and impossibility,since only Muslims, not Christians, had fascisct inclinations. Earth to Boze. What religion were the people of Nazi Germany? Sytman seemed uncomfortable with having Tangly, A LIBERAL, in the studio , as if he regretted not suiting up in a full biohazrd outfit before the beginning of the movie discussion hour


Kevin Phillips has some valid points about the Republicans. Does Phillips say that the Democrats would do better ? I doubt it - but in some areas they probably would. The balance of power between the two parties typically gets the best results. Repubs have been screwing up at the national level big time - no thanks to the Demoncats, who are good at adding negativity and vitreol to the debate and also aiding the terrorists, with them and the ACLU's talk about giving terrorists civil rights, which they obviously don't deserve. Nah, they don't need to apologize about that - thats just politics - dirtier than ever.

I think the O'Reilly debate has blown itself out temporarily so here's more fuel for the fire; Olberman won't be around on MSNBC in two years with the puny ratings he keeps getting. He is gaining very slightly and O'Reilly is losing a bit, but there is such a chasm between them - it is ridiculous to compare the recent ratings, but in case JDB wants to keep trying, here they are once again;



Ratings - 4-27-04



If we can be rational (that may be a stretch though) and separate the bad thing that Bill did in 2004 and note that O'Reilly has done some worthwhile things, such as; recently he promoted a drive to get rid of Judge Conner in Ohio who gave a two time child rapist 6 months probation. This movement has garnered some traction, as the Governor and State Legislature has looked into recalling Connor, who is unfit to serve on the bench with irresponsible verdicts like that. Of course, the ACLU would think that Bill is a demon and has no business to affect the judiciary, even if idiots like Connor are out of control and need to go, and judges that appointed can only thrown out by legislative action.


"Everyone conveniently ignores the point: Olberman is gaining share while O'Reilly is losing share. Attack all you want with your fanciful points of view, the facts are the facts. Sorry Oreilly fan."

(courtesy of Helmut Gutter)
WED, JAN 05, 2005


the PDF's show Olberman around .4 and O'Reilly around 2.0

1/30 - 2/24/06 PDF

O'Reilly 1.9
Olberman .4

Keep tilting at windmills, Joanie - whatever gives you comfort, dear.


Well, I'm no fan of Bill Clinton's but I'll take his surplus, correct grammar, world-wide admiration, employment numbers, warning about terrorism (conveniently ignored prior to 9-11) and avoidance of warring any day over the current situation.

Interestingly, I was just watching Jeff Faux on CSpan. He wrote "The Global Class War" and he commented that Clinton was a red-state president who did more for republicans by helping agriculture (think Tyson) and corporations than he did the traditional democratic base of northern states, labor and industry. He has set back the democratic party significantly by not being a democratic president.

I agree with that. The average man and woman in America is losing big time. If it hasn't caught up with you yet, just wait. It will. Then I think we'll be hearing a different story from an awful lot of people.


"Well, I'm no fan of Bill Clinton's but I'll take his surplus, correct grammar, world-wide admiration, employment numbers, warning about terrorism (conveniently ignored prior to 9-11) and avoidance of warring any day over the current situation.

Interestingly, I was just watching Jeff Faux on CSpan. He wrote "The Global Class War" and he commented that Clinton was a red-state president who did more for republicans by helping agriculture (think Tyson) and corporations than he did the traditional democratic base of northern states, labor and industry. He has set back the democratic party significantly by not being a democratic president."

Joanie, with all due respect your right about the impact of Clinton on the Democratic Party. I'll just add this:
How about his treatment of women in the workplace? And then undermining the position of traditional Democratic Power bases such as NOW that were forced to come to his aid in defense of the charges that he sexually harrassed women using his position of power on subordinates (ask yourself, they all couldn't have been lying, could they?) or African Americans that were only used when he was in trouble but he couldn't really be troubled to put them in positions of real power such as Sec of State.
The 'right wing' couldn't have devised a better scenario to make NOW look hypocritical than what played out in the late 90's.
So when it comes down to 2008 if the Dems turn away from a Gore and go again with a Clinton it shall be interesting.


I don't see the connection with my post. I said I wasn't enamored of Clinton but sure think his political instincts were a whole lot more productive. Also, he was not a president whose loyalties were to the Democratic base.

As ffor 2008, I don't see anybody on the horizon either on the left or the right I'm particularly interested in supporting at this point.


You know, PS. A few threads ago I said I thought the first woman pres would be Christine Gregoire. Perhaps you think I'm joking . . . well, I'm not.

I know it is a stretch. But, I think having a female pres is still a ways off. Also, successful bids for presidents often come from the state govs: Carter, Clinton, Bush. I have great respect for Gregoire; so much so, in fact, I think she could be the one.


I was in agreement with you and if you'll re- read my post you'll see that my point is going towards Clinton and a potent portion of the core Democratic Party Base.
Your very very right that Clinton was a politico with a highly nuanced political sense. He knew which elements he could pay lipservice to in the good times and in the bad times would be forced to come to his defense even when it was to their detriment. He largely played the liberal element of the Dem Party for fools ie took the money and ran to the right. That has to suck from your perspective.
In regards to Gregoire we'll see. Her stint as AG was less than stellar in regards to that office and in a state that voted overwhelmingly for Kerry and Murray -even her own backers will note- she barely beat the Republican. In other words, it shouldn't have been as close as it was given the advantage she had coming in. But WA State economy is improving and she has a number of years to make things happen. As a Washingtonian, I can only hope she does well.
Take Care


Re Gregoire: the sensationalization of losing the money because her office wasn't up on the timeline (sorry, I don't remember the details) was a big hit that she took esp. in the repub campaign. A bit like Kerry's having to deal with the Swift boaties.

I think we are in an era where sound bites and attacks hit their marks much more often than in the past. Although I do remember the daisy ad and Willy Horton. It doesn't take much to sour a people. The power of advertising is huge. Obviously, that's why millions are spent on it.

As long as so many of us allow sound bites and commercials to impact our vote, it will be the same.

That could come back to haunt her again. But, she had a great reputation until then as attorney general. So, your accusation about how she "ran her office" may be a little inflated unless you have other examples by which to support that claim. I'd like to hear them. I had two opportunities to request help from the AG's office and both were handled so well. I have nothing but appreciation for the office itself.

I've seen nothing but savviness, authenticity, an ability to bring people together, She is smart, knowledgable, and capable. I've seen assertiveness and even agressiveness when needed. Integrity. I think she has it in spades. She is a great communicator. I didn't hear it, but she got some points on this blot for taking on John Carlson. That is just my read on the woman.

And, before you bring up her "no new taxes," the only politician that actually followed through with that mantra so far, I believe, is GWB. He's certainly not the model I'd choose for governor of WA State. When you get into office and see that to fix things, taxes may be needed, have the courage to raise them.

I'm not trying to sell you on Gregoire. I just don't agree that she handled her office poorly. I guess I'd need some specifics on that.

JMHO. :)


Actually Joanie,
I know from personal experiance when I was a law clerk that the issue of missing timelines from her office was not a one time deal. What was unique about that case was the amount involved, the subsequent publicity, the 'investigation that was aimed at making a subordinate take the fall', the ability of the 'designated victim' aka 'fall lady' in her office to fight back and win money thereby making the State a two time loser.
The other big hit came during the Dem Primaries in which she was accused of knowingly having joined a soriety that excluded african americans. At that time, she was locked in a fairly strong battle for the Dem nomination with Ron Sims and her angst wasn't directed at Repub's for that 'attack' it was directed at people in the Sims Campaign.

Let's call it all water under the bridge. Like I said, as a Washingtonian I want her to do well. It would be hypocritcal of me to adopt a knee jerk anti Christine response to all she does.
I ain't a wingnut type and if she does a great job I would have no problem voting for her.
Hey, I will applaud her for going on in debate against Carlson. He is a tough -but fair- debater.
The same office I worked was run by an attorney in private practive that had previously worked for her as an Assistant AG . He found her to be smart/fair. He was very distressed over the subsequent fall out of that investigation. And BTW, he was a Republican.


Thanks for the information. Of course, to be fair, I don't know the particulars and trust that you know "everything" so have an authoritative opinion on this. I do appreciate your telling me about the AG lawyer who respects her as well.

Because I think mistakes happen, I'll give her a pass on the past and judge her on the here and now which, so far, I like.


i appreciate the trust but its better to verify. usually works best. anyway,

if you want some background from a local paper here is the story from the seattle times. but if you google gregoire and janet capps you can find other stories on this. anyway, a quick link.



I've been trying to determine how to respond. You see, I think the Gregoire/Capps thing may be something I should know more about and look into. Of course I knew superficially about it but not any real condemning details.

But, clubs that college students join don't interest me at all. I'm sorry anybody is tagged for life for indiscreet choices they make when they are very young.

I felt the same about Alito. I could care less about his personal choices when in college. I care about how he dispenses justice in the here and now.

So, I guess I still don't go along with the notion that she has all this negative baggage in her resume. Regardless who tried to make it an issue, it was a non-issue to me. Are you someone who reacts to every negative accusation an adversary presents? To me, that college sorority thing was just not important.

blathering michael



I actually gave her a pass on it myself but the Sims campaign felt they could get traction on it and went with it during the campaign and she responded to it so obviously she felt it had the potential at least to damage her in the primaries. Look, IMHO she has no record of being racist and to tag her with it 30 plus years seemed a little much.
But you have a blue state like WA that voted overwhelmingly for Kerry and Murray YET when it came to Christine elected to crossover to the Repub. I'm guessing her campaign didn't strike the chord she wanted. In other words, the election was a lot closer than it should have been ie Rossi overperformed and Gregoire underperformed.
But now that she is the Gov she has 4 years to prove herself and put to rest all the reservations of those hundred of thousands Kerry/Murray voters who preferred Rossi to her in 2004. If she does, than she has that post WA Gov career that you have layed out for her.


I sort of figured that, B'Mike. Someone who knew me personally enough to send hugs and kisses..lol


Thanks. I feel somewhat vindicated because it became increasingly obvious his source of information was clearly Fox News and no other, contrary to his posts.

AudioS, you should be ashamed. :)


PS: am disappointed in Sims for pulling that stuff. I didn't know where it came from until you mentioned it above.

Regarding Washington as being a very blue state . . . I guess that's true sort of . . . the blues are centered in the urban areas nationwide. As our state grows - Eastern Wa, south and north - we may not be as blue statewide as you say.

We had a republican senator for a very long time and we've had republican govs . . . I just don't buy into that notion as much as you do, I think.

Still, I thought Gregoire should have done better and I though Rossi presented himself very well. Again, I think those malicious sound bites do a lot of damage. I think they helped GWB win twice. So, take that for what it's worth.


"We had a republican senator for a very long time and we've had republican govs . . . I just don't buy into that notion as much as you do, I think."

So why do you think that the same voters that went with Kerry and Murray took a look at Christine and went the other way?
It could also be the natural inclination of some people to want to diffuse power a bit so as to avoid one party rule.


Perhaps to avoid one-party rule and also because of so much right-wing spin about everything. Again, I think the dirty politics hits the target. I have less confidence that people really know/understand inssues. I think people are very influenced by slogans and accusations. They don't often find out the truth behind them.

Again, ads are phenomenally influential. That is why the ad business does so well.

As I recall, weren't the Bush people a little surprised that "blue" WA State wasn't as blue as they expected? Remind me the difference in numbers between Kerry and Bush in WA please? I think it was closer than you'd expect it to be. Just a guess . . . relying on my ancient memory!

joanie for PugetSound

I just looked up the popular count for Kerry (1,510,201) 53% and Bush: (1,304,894) 46% at "CNN.com Election Results"

Also, Murray beat Nethercutt 55% to 43%. I think people like Murray although Nethercutt made a decent showing.

Matter of curiosity here: can you remember campaigns on the Democratic side that have been equal to the Willy Horton, Swift Boats, the wheelchair guy who lost his legs in Nam (can't remember the name), flip-flopper, girlie boys? I remember the daisy ad which seems tame compared to the ruthlessness cited by the republicans. But, may just be my perspective.

Also, if you can, it will tell me that I don't notice the same tactics and I should be more aware of them.


Hey Joanie
Those Kerry/Murray vote numbers were even better than I recalled. So you have Christine losing at least two hundred thousand Dem voters that went for Rossi instead. Wow. If she would have lost the third recount her career would have been kaput after that kind of showing. Thanks for the numbers it helps to put it in perspective.

Actually, Willy Horton was first introduced by Al Gore against Michael Dukakis in the primaries in 1987. At the time it was a famous case in MA and Gore was running as a conservative Dem -recall his wife Tipper and the campaign to get lyrics rated on albums or that Gore was a pro-life Dem from Tenn early in his career- ; the 'wheelchair guy' I am assuming your referencing was Dem Max Cleveland who was injured in Vietnam and claimed that the Repub candidate Saxby Chambliss impugned his patriotism although the voters didn't agree with Max Cleveland; Flip Flopper seemed fairly innocuous but don't recall it being outside the mainstream, and girlie boys draws a blank with me.
The Horton ad was later taken up 1988 general election by the Repubs guru Lee Atwater who used it to great impact to show Dukakis as 'soft on crime' to which Dems responded that Atwater was using racist tactics. The more people talked about the ad the worse it got for Dukakis.

I also recall the 'no new taxes pledge' that Bush Sr. used in 1988. When -by Dem party theory- Bush raised taxes in 1990- in the Bush Clinton campaign Bush senior got clobbered for it. Bush Lied was a theme of that campaign. Bush was also labeled a 'Wimp' despite a fairly stellar war record.

joanie for PugetSound

Yes, I remember the "no new taxes" label. I think we hear that one quite a lot - "tax and spend liberals" "never met a tax they didn't like" - that all seems rather politic to me. I wouldn't consider those malicious. Perhaps you are reaching a bit.

I guess we just basically see things differently. The "large" difference between the Kerry-Bush vote is rather small I think. So did they at the time. If you look behind the numbers which you can do at the same site, you will see that men went for Bush while women went for Kerry in much larger numbers. In fact, women made the difference.

Regarding Max Clelland, I haven't heard that before about Gore so would have to check it out. Site please? Disappointed that Gore would do that.

Also, I don't remember the word "wimp" at the national convention. Perhaps you have a better memory than I. In fact, I don't remember any such language at the national convention.

I do remember Lee Atwater apologizing before he died for his brand of dirty tricks.


After all those dirty tricks he was responsible for, Atwater was probably afraid of going to hell.


I guess I wasn't too clear. Sorry, my bad.
The Max Clelland (Dem) and Saxby Chambliss (Rep) were diffferent issues than the Gore vs Dukakis in 1987-88. Two different things. Gore is a tough politician just ask Bill Bradley about the 2000 primary battle against Al. Bradley got hit fairly hard.
In regards to Bush Sr., was this: He ran in 88 on a No New Taxes Pledge. When the economy started to run into problems in order to get things going Bush Sr. broke his pledge and raised taxes. The same Dem Party that applauded him for raising taxes in 1990 than in 1992 crowed about Bush breaking his promise not to raise taxes.
The Wimp factor -while not a convention topic per se- was even a subject of a Time Magazine cover.
We'll just have to agree to disagree on the WA State race. Kerry had it won and I don't think many people were surprised at the outcome.
When you beat someone by 8 percentage points or 12 percentage points by the Murray count it isn't a close race. People didn't vote for Christine cause she was a female or a Dem-witness the vote for Murray- rather they didn't vote for her because her campaign didn't come off like she wanted it to. But she is the Gov so she can set things up for 2008 with a strong showing over the next few years.


"After all those dirty tricks he was responsible for, Atwater was probably afraid of going to hell."

Well not sure if hell exists for political sins but if it does he is gonna have plenty of political pards to keep him company.


Actually, 7 point spread 53-46 is not "overwhelming" - "But you have a blue state like WA that voted overwhelmingly for Kerry and Murray. . ."

Certainly one popular senator does not make a state overwhelmingly blue. I remember when Jackson and Evans were overwhelmingly popular. Did you consider the state overwhemlingly red then?

Do you expect Cantwell - who squeaked by last time -to be overwhelmingly reelected? I think you are fitting the facts a bit. They don't support this "overwhelmingly blue" scenario you are painting.

Also, individual campaigns do seem to bring out the worst. I think you could ask Dave Ross about that. But, national campaigns haven't - to my knowledge - been so full of dirty politics as the republican campaigns of the last eight years.

Must just be my perception.


Joanie, there were a lot of people who contributed to the smearing of Max Cleland:
Ann Coulter:
“If Cleland had dropped a grenade on himself at Fort Dix rather than in Vietnam, he would never have been a U.S. Senator in the first place. Maybe he’d be the best pharmacist in Atlanta,” Coulter said in her column, published on February 11.

“He didn't ‘give his limbs for his country,’ or leave them ‘on the battlefield,’” Coulter said. “There was no bravery involved in dropping a grenade on himself with no enemy troops in sight.”

Cleland was wounded picking up a grenade that someone else had dropped.

Rusty Paul, a Georgia Republican Party strategist, said Coulter crossed the line with her comments.

“You can't take away from Max Cleland his record of service to this country and the sacrifice that he's made, regardless of the circumstances. To me, that's out of bounds to talk about that,” he said.

from NYTimes:
Never one to let the facts get in the way of a good story, Ann Coulter is standing by her bizarre assault on Max Cleland, the former Democratic Senator. Coulter still insists he's not a Vietnam war hero.

True, Cleland lost both legs and an arm -- but Coulter has done us the important service of noting that those three limbs were not shot off, one by one, with an AK-47 wielded by an actual screaming Viet Cong. Ergo, they aren't combat injuries.


How about the 12 points you quoted me as the differential for Murray?
I missed the Ross-Reichert election in terms of smears. Please educate me on that one? I thought they both ran above board campaigns.
My understanding of Max Cleland was that he earned a Silver Star while in Vietnam prior to his devestating injuries sustained in an unfortunate accident. By any measure, Cleland is someone who should be honored for his service.
Take Care


Re Murray, I did answer it. I said she is obviously a popular senator. You didn't answer mine about Cantwell, Evans or Jackson. What about Gorton?

Again, you said "overwhelmingly" and I don't see a seven-point spread as "overwhelming" any more than I see Washington as the overwhelingly blue state - esp. given the history of republicans Washingtonians have put into office.

Re Ross/Reichert, I heard Dave Ross talking about how the repubs conduct campaigns using his as an example. I, too, do not know the specifics which is why I said to ask him. It was his perception, not mine. That is a race that meant nothing to me.

Also, you did not answer my point about urban vs rural in terms of red and blue.

Finally, I agree that any soldier should be honored for their service whether they be Cleland or Kerry or anyone else. We agree on that.

I don't know what more to say.


Sparky, Anne Coulter is a disgrace to the right but they seem to like her. I don't get it. I'm sure someone will pull out Michael Moore's name to refute but there is nothing even remotely similar about their tactics. That is the sorry state of affairs in politics these days.




Conservatives like An Coulter because she's a bully. She's the kind of person who would both laugh at and insult a one legged retarded kid. Conservatives secretly want to laugh and relish at the short comings of others but they are restrained by social norms. They live out their fantasy vicariously through her mean spirited ranting.

A recent study showed that conservatives are whiny and insecure as children. I suspect that later in life they must put down other to feel better about themselves and to fill that insecurity which exists in their child ego.

This fact was also well demonstrated by the recent outburt from a well known board conservitive here on this blog, who with one ego preaches Christian values, but with an alter ego lashed out at his oponent to remind himself that's a better person.

Deep seated insecurity demands re-assurance and An Coulter serves it up.


Ooops. My bad again.
But too bad you couldn't give me some examples of what Dave said. If I get the chance I'll ask but its gonna be hit and miss until the next primaries before he will likely open that topic again. So, absent your examples I am unlikely to learn the dirty tricks he was subject to in his election attempt.
Imho but Repub Sen Evans was out of the Senate after one term in 1988. Wasn't he done with politics at that point?
Dem Sen Scoop Jackson died in the early 80's.
Yes, Repub Sen Gorton had what was like 3 terms I think he won one and then came back after losing to get a few more terms before losing to Cantwell. But he wasn't a fire breathing conservative was he? But yes, he was a Repub that won statewide. Other than him, are there any in recent history (like the last 18 years?) who were even close for either Sen or Gov?
Cantwell may have challanges both in her own primary from the left but I am not sure what your asking of me to say about her.

Urban vs Rural, I didn't realize you needed me to agree with you on that. I agree that it is real and it exists here which is why Doc Hastings and Jim McDermott could never get elected in the other's district. But the urban center of the Seattle-Tacoma region is difficult to overcome on a statewide basis which is why on a statewide basis for elective office I call Washington more reliably blue than red. Geographically, its a different story of course.

How about if we say the 7 points is 'decisive' ?
I don't want to get into one of those debates like political 'prognosticator' vs political 'analyst' again.


See I get tied up doing my taxes and my head goes kablooey!
Now I gotcha on Cantwell vs Gorton. Yes, Cantwell did win and Gorton -despite the power of incumbancy- lost to her on a statewide basis.
She ran a great campaign and was able to overcome the name recognition factor and comfort factor that people had had with Gorton.
Not trying to cherry pick by going back 18 years but since the one term Evans was kind of the demarcation line I was going for.


Evans was governor of Washington and that's what I was referring to.

I think I can't really argue nit-picking . . . my only comment was that the state is not that "overwhelmingly" blue and that the west side seems to be bluer and the eastern part of the state redder . . . that 7 points doesn't seem overwhelming to me . . . that we've enjoyed both repubs and democrats over our history . . . and I don't know what else to say.

Oh, I still think I've seen more dirty tricks and abusive comments on the part of republicans. I've stated my examples and you welcome to knock them down as you wish.

Actually, I don't really care . . .

The comments to this entry are closed.

April 2013

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30        

Tip Jar

Change is good

Tip Jar

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    pacific nw talk stations

    • KIRO 710ESPN Seattle 710 KHz
      Games and sports-blabber
    • KIROFM 97.3
      Multi-format: news and nearly all local talk. This is where classic KIRO AM news talk radio went... hopefully, not to die. The home of Dave Ross & Luke Burbank, Dori Monson, Ron & Don, Frank Shiers, Bill Radke, Linda Thomas, Tony Miner and George Noory.
    • KUOW FM 94.9
      Seattle's foremost public radio news and talk.
    • KVI am 570 KHz
      Visit the burnt-out husk of one of the seminal right-wing talkers in all the land. Here's where once trilled the reactionary tones of Rush Limbaugh, John Carlson, Kirby Wilbur, Mike Siegel, Peter Weissbach, Floyd Brown, Dinky Donkey, and Bryan Suits. Now it's Top 40 hits from the '60's & '70's aimed at that diminishing crowd who still remembers them and can still hear.
    • KTTH am 770 KHz
      Right wing home of local, and a whole bunch of syndicated righties such as Glennn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Medved, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Lars Larsony, and for an hour a day: live & local David Boze.
    • KPTK am 1090 KHz
      Syndicated liberal talk. Stephanie Miller, Thom Hartmann, Ed Schultz, Randi Rhodes, Norman Goldman fill in the large hole to the left on Northwest radio dial.
    • KLFE AM 1590 kHz
      Syndicated right-wing 2nd stringers like Mark Levin, Bill Bennett, Mike Gallagher, Dennis Prager, Dennis Miller and Hugh Hewitt inhabit this timid-voiced neighbor honker for your radio enjoyment (unless you're behind something large like Costco).
    • KOMOAM
      News, traffic, Ken Schram and John Carlson.
    • Washington State Radio Stations
      Comprehensive list of every danged AM & FM station on the dial.
    • KKOL am 1300 KHz
      Once a rabid right-wing talker, except for Lou Dobbs, it's all business....