Mark Halperin Still Doesn't Know What He's Talking About.

[babylonsister]

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=10&year=2010&base_name=mark_halperin_still_doesnt_kno

Mark Halperin Still Doesn't Know What He's Talking About.


For someone who only writes about politics, Mark Halperin knows stunningly little about the forces that drive any given election. For example, watch as he tries to explain President Obama's political woes without mentioning the economy, unemployment, or historical patterns:

With the exception of core Obama Administration loyalists, most politically engaged elites have reached the same conclusions: the White House is in over its head, isolated, insular, arrogant and clueless about how to get along with or persuade members of Congress, the media, the business community or working-class voters. This view is held by Fox News pundits, executives and anchors at the major old-media outlets, reporters who cover the White House, Democratic and Republican congressional leaders and governors, many Democratic business people and lawyers who raised big money for Obama in 2008, and even some members of the Administration just beyond the inner circle.

Really? The White House that moved guaranteed health care through Congress is "clueless" about how to persuade members of Congress? I guess that's true, but only if we can agree that General Patton didn't really know how to wage a war, and Martin Scorsese is merely an okay filmmaker.

Sarcasm aside, if arrogance and insularity are the defining features of a losing White House, then they must be true of nearly every presidential administration in the post-war era; since World War II, the president's party has lost an average of 24 seats in midterm election, with two exceptions in sixteen elections. Indeed, the second of those exceptions was George W. Bush, who if anything, had arrogance and insularity in spades.

You don't actually need to spend your time recording the thoughts of party elites to know what will happen in a midterm year like this one. Here's why: if the president's party has a large majority, they'll lose seats. If the president is polling under 50 percent, they'll lose more seats. If the economy is poor, they'll lose even more seats. Hell, if they do absolutely nothing but the bare minimum to succeed, they will still lose seats. The simple fact is that you don't actually need to know anything about the personality of a given White House to know how the president's party will fare in midterm elections; they will lose, and the only question is "by what margin?"

-- Jamelle Bouie

[Spazito]

The stench of desparation coming from the likes of Halperin is growing exponentially...

Their attempts to malign the Obama Presidency are becoming more and more ludicrous with each pathetic attempt.

It has become almost laughable.

[sharp_stick]

1. Oh he knows exactly what he's talking about

he's a douchbag senior fellow of the asshole brigade known as the Claremont Institute and he was a foreign policy advisor and speech writer for Bob Dole.

If he's writing something it's done for the sole purpose of stirring the shit. Mark Helperin is a lowlife scumbag and third rate writer, that's about it.

[drm604]

2. He uses the opinions of Fox News pundits

as if that adds to his argument. :eyes: :rofl:

[Cosmocat]

4. "politically engaged elites"

seriously, like, that doesn't include him ...

And, yeah, his LEADING OFF with Fox pretty much is a sad testiment to how far in the tank the MSM is at this point with the republican party that they can't even try to hide it ...

[mstinamotorcity]

3. If its not gossip

Marl Halperin can't use it. He needs a Game Change.:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: