Look at Me!

You can tell that I've officially jumped the shark, since there's an article in The New York Times Style section about how my roommates and I all have blogs and are friends with other political bloggers. The good news is that while I was afraid intrepid reporter Ashley Parker would try to compensate for the fact that we're not very interesting by being really mean, she seems to have resisted the temptation. Plus, I really like the photo Michael Temchine took that I stole above and they used with the article. Do people care about this stuff? Probably someone does, and whoever that is probably isn't you, the kind of person who's reading blogs on a Sunday. Instead, you, my readers, are going to make fun of me.

And that's fine. Mock all you like. But if you don't pre-order a copy of Heads in the Sand, I'll cry.

Comments

Wow, Ross wrote a book? That's cool.

Posted by yazzel | March 9, 2008 10:38 AM

But if you don't pre-order a copy of Heads in the Sand, I'll cry.

You don't really understand the incentives at play here, do you?

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | March 9, 2008 10:39 AM

"Mock all you like. But if you don't pre-order a copy of Heads in the Sand, I'll cry."

How very Clintonian of you, Matt. Is this an attempt to win a larger readership among older white women? And do you now regard Wyoming as a non-state?

Posted by morzer | March 9, 2008 10:40 AM

You're only 26????

Posted by Elizabeth | March 9, 2008 10:42 AM

Weep you literate scum, weep! Do you think we can be so easily persuaded? We don't want tears, we want bribes, pork, redistricting in Texas and foot-tapping in bathrooms.

Posted by rober | March 9, 2008 10:45 AM

Isn't Matt the one in the middle, between Ross and Gollum?

Posted by zilifant | March 9, 2008 10:51 AM

Uh, shouldn't we be clicking on the links so that you guys can afford to turn on the lights?

Posted by mwg | March 9, 2008 10:53 AM

The most impressive thing about the picture is the way all three tummies curve forward in parallel. Such a plump and elegant symmetry.

Posted by tozz | March 9, 2008 10:54 AM

Foster, the Scientist, wins IL-14 and Big Media Matt makes the NY Times.

Nerd is the new black.

C

Posted by Poicephalus | March 9, 2008 10:55 AM

This photo could be for our generation what that picture of the sailor kissing the girl in the WWII victory parade was for the greatest generation.

Posted by lampwick | March 9, 2008 10:55 AM

If I am going to invest, Matt, I expect at least to be greeted with, "Me love you long time".

Posted by jillqpublic | March 9, 2008 10:56 AM

I don't read books, you liberal-sipping, latte-driving scum! I am a proud Republican and gay of it.

D. Hastert

Posted by dhastert | March 9, 2008 11:04 AM

Matt, I think your book is a marvellous display of feminine sensibility and masculine analysis. But should Mr Darcy really get the girl in the end?

Posted by sashaqz | March 9, 2008 11:09 AM

Matt, as a graduate student who spends a lot of time in poorly lit laboratories staring at computer screens, let me just say that I salute you. Apparently political bloggers and lab scientists share similar habitats.

Posted by Sefrankel | March 9, 2008 11:09 AM

All this picture needs is some coral and a mannequin in a diver suit.

Posted by calling all toasters | March 9, 2008 11:18 AM

How can it be a good thing that you are best buds with so many other bloggers? That the blogosphere has become what I always feared: an online version of the incestuous MSM?

Although, with the increasing attention paid to you guys in the corporate media, and with more and more shiny/happy profiles in the glossy rags, you are now being assimilated into the MSM as well.

Where does one go these days for an independent, non-incestuous, non-corporate perspective on news and politics?

Sad.

And yeah, you guys need to get off the couch and into a gym.

Posted by Tim | March 9, 2008 11:20 AM

How can it be a good thing that you are best buds with so many other bloggers? That the blogosphere has become what I always feared: an online version of the incestuous MSM?

Although, with the increasing attention paid to you guys in the corporate media, and with more and more shiny/happy profiles in the glossy rags, you are now being assimilated into the MSM as well.

Where does one go these days for an independent, non-incestuous, non-corporate perspective on news and politics?

Sad.

And yeah, you guys need to get off the couch and into a gym.

Posted by Tim | March 9, 2008 11:21 AM

How can it be a good thing that you are best buds with so many other bloggers? That the blogosphere has become what I always feared: an online version of the incestuous MSM?

Although, with the increasing attention paid to you guys in the corporate media, and with more and more shiny/happy profiles in the glossy rags, you are now being assimilated into the MSM as well.

Where does one go these days for an independent, non-incestuous, non-corporate perspective on news and politics?

Sad.

And yeah, you guys need to get off the couch and into a gym.

Posted by Tim | March 9, 2008 11:21 AM

Tim, you must be amazingly passionate about this - three repetitions of your case... perhaps a little too passionate, hmmm?

Posted by sashaqz | March 9, 2008 11:29 AM

I guess Tim wants all THREE of you into the gym pronto. But that would mean your perfect tummies would go away. Sad.

Posted by print refugee | March 9, 2008 11:29 AM

There is a severe problem on the Atlantic website with comments appearing two, three, or more times. Since this seems to happen with many different commentors, it can't be simply human error (or if it is, there's something about the website that is inducing such errors)

As for the NYT article, it's easy to laugh at the eerily similar physical appearances of those three guys. I guess the weird part is the eerily similar lifestyles. You guys should go and be a "beat blogger" for six months in Dallas or Orlando or something.

Posted by nbt | March 9, 2008 11:31 AM

I propose that we title the picture:

The Dark Side of the Liberal Moon" and sell framed copies at $20 bucks a pop. Surely a merchandising opportunity, Senor Yglesias?

To be non-partisan about this, we require another tasteful print, depicting "The Triumph of Sullivan",with Andrew in heroic nudity, wielding a golden dogwhistle, driving a chariot pulled by a naked Douthat in a black leather mask.

Posted by mazirion | March 9, 2008 11:35 AM

In the NY TImes article, the writter sniffs:
"The Flophouse bloggers may not be part of the traditional mainstream news media,"

-----------
Ha ha ha. The Times goes slumming in the ghetto and talks , in a patronizing way, about these eccentric little creatures called bloggers.

Oh, well, it was in the Times Fashion section after all. Not as if they were talking about Hard News.

Posted by Don Williams | March 9, 2008 11:36 AM

Seriously, you and your friends, go for a walk. Outside. During the day.

Posted by Tom | March 9, 2008 11:43 AM

Not a HINT in the Times article re sexual activity at the Flophouse.

The impression left is that the narcissic aspect of the blogger mind is so dominent that all passion is poured into an continual torrent of "Look at Me" postings.

Which is probably the most depressing --and dismissive -- aspect of the Times Article.

Posted by Don Williams | March 9, 2008 11:44 AM

There is a severe problem on the Atlantic website with comments appearing two, three, or more times.

FYI, the problem seems to be this: there's a looong delay between when a commenter clicks "Post" and when the page updates. There's an even more insidious problem in that the Atlantic server sometimes returns a "connection unavailable" message when a comment has in fact been posted successfully. It's easy for a commenter to assume the server or browser's not responding and click "Post" more than once.

Posted by James Gary | March 9, 2008 11:52 AM

I think I saw your chair in a guest-starring role over at the blog "stuff white people like"

Posted by Rufustfyrfly | March 9, 2008 12:08 PM

I'm with Elizabeth:

You're only 26????

At first I thought the title of the article was an allusion to the Postal Service song "The District Sleeps Alone Tonight." I think it would be cooler that way. Can you get them to retitle it "The District Doesn't Sleep Alone Tonight?"

Posted by Ted | March 9, 2008 12:10 PM

Spackerman's moving to CAP? Is he going to call his blog THFTNRBNTHFCAP?

Posted by dbt | March 9, 2008 12:14 PM

You guys are going to go blind at an early age.

Posted by GtheK | March 9, 2008 12:17 PM

You can't really tell it from the photo, but the funny thing is that the three of them are actually having a really heated debate with each other about the NBA's carbon footprint.

Posted by lampwick | March 9, 2008 12:21 PM

The article is just fine.

You've jumped the shark on content over the past month.

Posted by Petey | March 9, 2008 12:24 PM

They really missed a great piece by not bringing Triumph the Insult Dog over for a visit.

Posted by Flynn | March 9, 2008 12:30 PM

When I look at matt, the first thing I that comes to mind is "some Seth Rogen character with a Ph.D. from Harvard’s Kennedy School".

And I'll do one better ... I'll organize a book signing for him.

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | March 9, 2008 12:31 PM

Do people care about this stuff?

Lonely men.

Posted by M | March 9, 2008 12:31 PM

The NYTimes Style section is a terrible excuse for . . . well, for anything. How could you associate yourself with it?

Posted by BarryG | March 9, 2008 12:37 PM

Petey's projecting again.

Posted by dafonz | March 9, 2008 12:39 PM

I reckon the real Petey crawled into a bottle after Edwards croaked. The person we see here is just someone lonely troll borrowing an honorable soldier's name.

Posted by yilderim | March 9, 2008 12:47 PM

I especially enjoy the standard-issue sets of rectangular black plastic-framed glasses. I think they must come free with the purchase of any MacBook.

Posted by Shochu John | March 9, 2008 12:53 PM

"I reckon the real Petey crawled into a bottle after Edwards croaked. The person we see here is just someone lonely troll borrowing an honorable soldier's name."

Nope. The real Petey just decided that defending the only candidate who picked up the flag of the Edwards healthcare plan, the core of his campaign, trumped all other considerations.

Senator Clinton earned my vote.

I'm a social justice Democrat, not someone who sides with the economically upscale goo-goos.

Posted by Petey | March 9, 2008 12:57 PM

Senator Clinton earned Petey's vote with her vote for the war, Kyle Lieberman, Bankruptcy, and most of all her willingness to embrace lobbyist and openly declare they will be part of her administration. Edwards is very proud of Petey.

Posted by bjd | March 9, 2008 1:03 PM

What a hillarious picture. Please tell me you guys staged it. What would be funny is if that was the way you guys talked to each other.

Posted by Mike | March 9, 2008 1:08 PM

Nice Wassily Chair! you can get those at design within reach for $1600-$1,824. Why isn't anyone sitting in it?

Posted by speakesa | March 9, 2008 1:12 PM

"Where does one go these days for an independent, non-incestuous, non-corporate perspective on news and politics?"

Here: Steve Sailer's iSteve Blog. You don't have to worry about Sailer getting profiled in the NY Times Style Section anytime soon.

Posted by Juan | March 9, 2008 1:13 PM

At least Matt recognizes it's a bad sign to have a nice photo and lead story in the Style section.

Also good to see they're drinking beer and so aren't part of the dreaded "wine track."

Petey has turned me off on the subject of health care for ever. Now whenever I read "health care" my eyes glaze over. I'm still holding out hope that Obama promises Edwards the Attorney General spot and Edwards endorses him sometime before the convention.

Posted by Peter K. | March 9, 2008 1:14 PM

I am more proud today than any other day.

Posted by bend | March 9, 2008 1:22 PM

Ah, so Petey wants the candidate who voted for an oppressive credit card bill - but was glad it didn't pass? He wants Hillary "DOMA" Clinton? He wants the person who is endorsing John McCain, rather than fighting for Democrats? He wants Hillary "No, I don't release my tax forms or my documents" Clinton? Well, Petey, speaking as a perfectly typical Democrat, not wealthy non-goo-goo, I reckon your idea of social justice ain't worth a bucket of rancid piss. But then, since you are now supporting Monsters Inc. I guess you just got a taste for it.

Posted by yilderim | March 9, 2008 1:24 PM

Poor old Petey, from supporting the wealthy, pandering lawyer to supporting the wealthy pandering... lawyer. Well, he is consistent, I suppose. The line about social justice is the hoot of the week though. Hillary Clinton for social justice?

What next,Hillary Clinton the Peace Angel of Northern Ireland? Hillary Clinton the Opener of Kosovo's Borders? Hillary "I voted for diplomacy not force" Clinton? Hillary "John McCain is my friend" Clinton? Hell, why not just go all the way and campaign honestly as "Hillary Clinton the Republican-lite candidate - like John McCain, only less so."

Posted by maxq | March 9, 2008 1:30 PM

Don't feed the Petey.

Posted by John | March 9, 2008 1:40 PM

As Elizabeth said: 26!

The issue is surely not whether someone is or is not in the MSM but whether they make sense or not.

The book looks as if it makes much sense by the way.

Posted by Chris Dornan | March 9, 2008 1:42 PM

I've already pre-ordered HITS (hey, great acronym!), so stop crying already, Matt. Yeeesh.

Posted by beckya57 | March 9, 2008 1:42 PM

Clearly, the candidate who voted for the war and thinks John McCain would be a nifty CinC is the social justice candidate. Because 400,000+ dead Iraqis, 3,000+ dead Americans, 5 years of ethnic cleansing, tens of thousands of injured and traumatized vets, hundreds of millions of dollars in Halliburton handouts, and $3T down the drain that could have been spent on something useful is the epitome of social justice.

Posted by dougie fresh | March 9, 2008 1:46 PM

"...like Seth Rogen with a PhD from the Kennedy School."

Um...

Posted by Matthew Struhar | March 9, 2008 1:59 PM

One month later Matt hit upon 'The Other Other Operation'. In this the victim was threatened that if he didn't buy the book, Matt would not cry. This for Matthew Yglesias was the turning point.

(just riffing off SomeCallMeTim)

Posted by ferd | March 9, 2008 2:07 PM

There is a severe problem on the Atlantic website with comments appearing two, three, or more times.

Well, if The Atlantic ever wants to fix this annoying problem, it would just take about five minutes and a couple of lines of code.

Remember, duplicated comments are just that, duplicated. So before a comment's text is inserted into the SQL database table, just compare the text with all the comments inserted in that thread by the same commenter during the last five minutes, and cancel the insert if there's an exact match.

This isn't exactly rebuilding the Linux-kernal, folks! And no software-consulting fee is requested.

Posted by RKU | March 9, 2008 2:11 PM

Clearly, the candidate who voted for the war and thinks John McCain would be a nifty CinC is the social justice candidate.

God damn, could you guys stick a sock in it? Because I'm really sick of reading vitriolic beating-a-dead-horse-HRC-vs-Obama comments--especially on threads where such comments are completely off-topic.

Posted by James Gary | March 9, 2008 2:17 PM

"They really missed a great piece by not bringing Triumph the Insult Dog over for a visit."

This is the best idea I've heard in a long, long time.

Posted by MattD | March 9, 2008 2:21 PM

"You guys should go and be a "beat blogger" for six months in Dallas or Orlando or something."

NBT offers a great suggestion here. Six months might make these kids homesick, but a couple of weeks in a Courtyard by Marriott or an Extended Stay America in somewhere like Houston, Oklahoma City, Fresno, or Spokane might give Matt & Co. new perspectives. Watch the local news at 11, read the local papers and the complimentary USA Today and WSJ over your buffet breakfast; have a beer at 6pm with the 40-year-old overweight white businessmen who run most of the American economy.

Posted by Fred | March 9, 2008 2:28 PM

Making the Sunday Styles section is the equivalent of you being Lindsay Lohan's pimp....Great job.

Posted by robertl | March 9, 2008 2:50 PM

Nice product placement in that piece.

MY gets free advertising for his book, Apple gets free advertising for their laptops, TAP/Reason/Atlantic get plugs for their publications...

The loser may be NYT, which just ran a piece in their Fashion/Style section about nerdy dudes who are neither stylish nor fashionable...

Posted by nbt | March 9, 2008 2:51 PM

Well, I visited your blog for the first time because of the article, as I'm sure others did. It can't help but help you (and/or The Atlantic Monthly). Though, given the readership, I'm sure the name of my company (Kulture Kids) will probably illicit a comment such as "you bring culture to kids and you can't even spell?"
Good luck on the book!

Posted by Tom Kerr | March 9, 2008 2:54 PM

I'm sure the name of my company (Kulture Kids) will probably illicit a comment such as "you bring culture to kids and you can't even spell?"

Not from Matt, it won't.

Posted by hum | March 9, 2008 3:00 PM

I'm sure the name of my company (Kulture Kids) will probably illicit a comment such as "you bring culture to kids and you can't even spell?"

The problem isn't so much "Kulture Kids" as it is "illicit." Actually, that looks just like one of Matt's typos. Are you sure you're not a sock puppet?

Posted by live | March 9, 2008 3:04 PM

Misspelled 'elicit' on purpose (honestly). You proved my point.

Posted by Tom Kerr | March 9, 2008 3:09 PM

Bully for you!

Posted by live | March 9, 2008 3:22 PM

Nice picture, but the article? Eh.

Now, if the New York Times ever did an article on blog commenters, now THAT would be an article worth reading!

Posted by Al | March 9, 2008 3:27 PM

Sometime in your mid-30s, you guys will discovery exercise and a healthy diet.

Why wait another 10 years?

Posted by blah | March 9, 2008 3:39 PM

Sometime in your mid-30s, you guys will discover exercise and a healthy diet.

Why wait another 10 years?

Posted by blah | March 9, 2008 3:40 PM

This is now my newest favorite thread ever. Keep up the witty comments. Soon we will have enough of Matt's tears to cure gypsy AIDS.

Also stay tuned for Petey's new book, "Goo-Goo Liberalism: An Infantile Disorder," now with a jacket blurb from Hugo Chavez!

Posted by Reality Man | March 9, 2008 3:48 PM

"It's 3 am in the flophouse... pick up the phone"

"Hi, Matt here.."

heavy breathing.. more heavy breathing

"This is Matt.. is that Andrew....?"

heavier heavy breathing

"Andrew... this isn't funny..."

"Hi, this is a call from Hillary Clinton. Hillary needs your vote for the Pennsylvania primaries. You know, sometimes it's worth votng tactically, even if you are a lifelong Republican. I am not saying Barack Obama is a Muslim, as far as I know. Remember, your vote counts. Save America from terrorists by putting an experienced non-Muslim in the White House CLICK".

Friend wanders in.. "Hey Matt, what sort of freak calls that late?"

"Oh, it was another crankcall from McCain's vicepresident, asking me to vote in Pennsylvania. No biggie, really."

"Hillary again? Man, that's the seventh robocall tonight. Can we sue for harrassment?"

Posted by kyrla | March 9, 2008 3:52 PM

I went to school with Mike Temchine. Is he still sporting that enormous afro?

Posted by Spike | March 9, 2008 4:37 PM

have a beer at 6pm with the 40-year-old overweight white businessmen who run most of the American economy.

i.e. people like Fred, who'll gladly tell you how it's all the fault of the darkies while knocking back another Coors Light.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | March 9, 2008 4:46 PM

I'm waiting for Matthew to put up a photo of him holding a gun to a puppy's head -- with the caption "Buy my book or I'm gonna shoot this dog".

Having the dog look sideways at the gun with an anxious look would be a nice touch, by the way.

Posted by Don Williams | March 9, 2008 5:10 PM

I'm waiting for Matthew to put up a photo of him holding a gun to a puppy's head -- with the caption "Buy my book or I'm gonna shoot this dog".

Having the dog look sideways at the gun with an anxious look would be a nice touch, by the way.

Posted by Don Williams | March 9, 2008 5:11 PM

Good to know that Matt makes good financial decisions. Spending your book advance on a flat-screen? Matt, you're a real American after all.

Posted by Klug | March 9, 2008 5:18 PM

You can get a flat-screen for 1-2% of Matt's book advance, Klug.

Posted by Barbar | March 9, 2008 5:41 PM

Irregardless, if that is the broken husk of Petey or actually Petey, there certainly is a class element that is under examined in the Clinton vs Obama race.
Affluent social liberals are supporting Obama whereas downscale economic liberals are supporting Clinton.

At some point in the future I would like to have a candidate that unifies both segments of the party.

Posted by pocketbook | March 9, 2008 5:46 PM

pocketbook - you'll find you already have one - and Barack Obama is his name. It's Hillary spin that only latte-drinkers vote for him - look at Virginia, South Carolina, Wisconsin, Maine... not exactly latte states, no? And he won massive victories with downscale voters in all of them. Hillary has the racist downscale voters and low information ones.

Posted by etchew | March 9, 2008 6:45 PM

Matt: "But if you don't pre-order a copy of Heads in the Sand, I'll cry."

Start crying.

Elizabeth: "You're only 26????"

Not only that, he's only four years out of college.

His nappies aren't even dry yet, but he thinks he's a "pundit".

And for those who are hitting the post button three times, I'll explain it all over AGAIN!

You DO NOT need to hit the post button more than once. The Atlantic servers are slow as molasses in REFRESHING the page - not in accepting your post.

Once you hit the Post button, your submission will hit their servers in milliseconds. After that, your submission will be processed by whatever lame CGI program they have handling this. At that point, your post will - barring a complete meltdown of their system - make it into the database.

What is happening is that their servers are very slow refreshing the page AFTER your post has been received.

All you have to do is watch your browser status bar.

In Firefox, it will first say something like "waiting for mattyglesias.the atlantic.com". After a few seconds or so, it will switch to "transmitting data from mattyglesias.theatlantic.com". That's when you know your post has made it.

At that point you can simply go to another page. If you sit there waiting for the page refresh, it can take thirty seconds or more. Don't bother. Go to another page or just refresh the page with your browser refresh button. You may have to refresh once or twice to see the page has your post.

It's also possible that your browser has cached the page as it was before your post. In that case, usually holding the CTRL key down and pressing function key F5 will refresh the page and the cache.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | March 9, 2008 6:47 PM

I'm disappointed you are not wearing a hoodie. This is the Style and Fashion section, after all.

Posted by Just Karl | March 9, 2008 6:51 PM

Yeah, Matt, you're like an indie band that blew off Subpop to sign a big contract with Columbia Records. Die yuppie scum! Your authenticity with the unwashed blogger masses is toast! There's no success like failure, dude, didn't you know?

Posted by elle loco | March 9, 2008 7:10 PM

"The loser may be NYT, which just ran a piece in their Fashion/Style section about nerdy dudes who are neither stylish nor fashionable..."

My girlfriend made the same point after reading the article.

"i.e. people like Fred, who'll gladly tell you how it's all the fault of the darkies while knocking back another Coors Light."

Pseudomonas, maybe you ought to try this exercise of getting out and meeting folks who are different than you too. It might help you get over some of your irrational prejudices. FWIW, I don't drink Coors Light, am not 40, can't take credit for keeping the economy running, and mercifully haven't had to stay in a Courtyard by Marriott in years. But I know better than to assume that the folks who do are all angry bigots. If you travel extensively through flyover land, as I have in the past on business, you'll find out that most Americans out there are actually quite friendly and decent. You should have a look-see sometime. It will be a welcome change from the bitter folks like yourself that you encounter in the lefty blogosophere or academia.

Posted by Fred | March 9, 2008 7:17 PM

The Fred doth protest too much, methinks.

But what would a thread here be like without his unceasing cry of 'Hispanics sure are dumb'?

Oh, I know: better.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | March 9, 2008 7:36 PM

Pseudo,

I hope you resist the urge to fake a hate crime on campus.

Posted by Fred | March 9, 2008 7:42 PM

You've got to love a photograph in which both the photographer's shadow and beer are clearly visible.

Posted by rufustfyrfly | March 9, 2008 9:54 PM

You've got to love a photograph in which both the photographer's shadow and beer are clearly visible.

Posted by rufustfyrfly | March 9, 2008 9:55 PM

"Irregardless, if that is the broken husk of Petey or actually Petey, there certainly is a class element that is under examined in the Clinton vs Obama race.
Affluent social liberals are supporting Obama whereas downscale economic liberals are supporting Clinton. "

Well I can guarantee you I make far less money than Petey, or probably the vast majority of the posters here, and I'm an Obama supporter.

Posted by mad6798j | March 9, 2008 10:14 PM

Fred, I hope you submit to the urge to fuck off and die.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | March 9, 2008 10:29 PM

etchew is a typical Obama blog commnenter.

Whenever the class divide is mentioned, they respond with 'but they are racists.' They can't seem to fathom or don't want to discuss, why a large segment of working class Democrats have rejected Obama. Downscale voters are almost always labeled ignorant or racists while affluent Obama voters are never labeled negatively eventhough they are both voting their economic interests. The spinmeisters don't want to discuss the class divide so they always seek to negate it with the racism charge.

Not so long ago Democrats who did not want to share the burden of universal heathcare or protect social security were roundly criticized on the left blogs. Nowadays, these same views are embraced as the height of progressivism.

The vanguard always turns its back on the proletariat.

Posted by Wellstone weeps | March 9, 2008 11:54 PM

Wellstone Weeps:

Yes, indeed! And this is what makes the position of the Obama commenters so totally contradictory as well.

On the one hand, they endlessly argue that "racism" is a huge factor behind Obama having pretty consistently lost the non-black Democratic vote to Hillary by an average of about 30+ points across all primaries.

Then, on the other hand, they ALSO argue that Obama will be able to draw vast numbers of Republican and conservative independent voters in November who'd never consider a vote for Hillary.

Now David Brooks could make this argument, since he and his friends are always claiming that the Democratic Party is the "racist" party while the Republican Party is the "anti-racist" party. But most Democrats I know tend to disagree with Brooks about this.

Posted by RKU | March 10, 2008 12:08 AM

"Fred, I hope you submit to the urge to fuck off and die."

Touché, Pseudomonas. Now I feel silly for writing this:

If you travel extensively through flyover land, as I have in the past on business, you'll find out that most Americans out there are actually quite friendly and decent. You should have a look-see sometime. It will be a welcome change from the bitter folks like yourself that you encounter in the lefty blogosophere or academia.

Posted by Fred | March 10, 2008 12:13 AM

"Then, on the other hand, they ALSO argue that Obama will be able to draw vast numbers of Republican and conservative independent voters in November who'd never consider a vote for Hillary."

Umm, when he won the white vote in Wisconsin, Clinton supporters were talking about how it didn't count because he got the edge from independents and Republicans crossing over to vote for Obama, which Clinton hasn't been able to get with Limbaugh's calls for sabotage. A bunch of Clinton supporters were making big hay out of the fact he lost white Democrats by 3%, yet ignoring the fact he won whites.

With that said, it is kind of surprising that I've only seen one article, from a while ago in TNR, about why there is something to a class dynamic among white Democrats, though that has been violated in places like Iowa and others where Obama won union voters. People talk about Clinton's debating ability, but the likelihood of someone watching a debate rises with education and income. In addition, the big controversial economic issue has been mandates, which downscale voters don't like. The TNR article mentioned the ethos of Rust Belt union seniority, which favors Clinton (despite serving less time in elected office than Obama and never holding an appointed office like in a cabinet), causes this - "paying one's dues" - while educated information workers tend to be younger and stress competence, judgment and the ability to adapt to a changing world than experience, which can actually hamper one with an outdated view of how the world works. Such voters tend not to care about "experience." Add in the fact that high-information voters know that her experience argument is bullshit (being older and in the public eye isn't experience). After all, if Clinton supporters really cared about experience or competence, they would have backed Dodd, Biden or Richardson. My guess is that a lot of downscale workers did well under Bill Clinton and think there will be a repeat of the 1990's economy with Hillary Clinton in charge. When it comes down to it, it's not about policy, since Hillary can't repeat Bill's policies relating to the internet bubble and the end of the Cold War. They don't like mandates. It's about Bill.

Posted by Reality Man | March 10, 2008 2:12 AM

The most impressive thing about the picture is the way all three tummies curve forward in parallel. Such a plump and elegant symmetry.

Damn, that's funny!

Posted by beowulf | March 10, 2008 2:19 AM

Ladies and gentlemen, journalism in the 21st Century: A gaggle of fat, white twenty-somethings in a spacious, sterile room talking to each other on their MacBooks.

It'd be one thing if y'all were just bloggers out there in the ether, doing your thing. That's cool. But the fact that you're now paid by formerly venerable journalistic institutions like The Atlantic to parrot the same old CW back and forth among each other until it crystallizes into fact? Pathetic.

Posted by Kevin | March 10, 2008 2:33 AM

"But the fact that you're now paid by formerly venerable journalistic institutions like The Atlantic to parrot the same old CW back and forth among each other until it crystallizes into fact? Pathetic."

I'd venture that managing to get institutions like the Atlantic to pay you to write extemporaneously on the Internet is impressive, not pathetic.

Posted by Fred | March 10, 2008 3:00 AM

I meant pathetic for the state of journalism and their understanding of blogging, not pathetic for Yglesias, per se. Obviously, he and Ambinder are milking it for all its worth, doing exactly what millions of people do as a hobby anyway, only less interestingly and for money.

Posted by Kevin | March 10, 2008 3:12 AM

"Also stay tuned for Petey's new book, "Goo-Goo Liberalism: An Infantile Disorder"

Three cheers for Reality Man.

-----

And I also concur with Just Karl's complaint. A hoodie was mandatory for the photo.

Posted by Petey | March 10, 2008 8:24 AM

I too really like that picture. I won't read the article, because I'm not a Sunday blog reader. No love for your M-F jacking off during work hours blog reader?

Hey, if I ever make it to DC I'll take pictures like this for you, you vain SOB.

Posted by freddiemac | March 10, 2008 10:01 AM

Am I the only one who finds it unsettling that the role of public intellectual is increasingly filled by this breed of - admittedly intelligent and precocious - slovenly, wet-behind-the-ears, keyboard jockeys? Not only the three Adonises in the photograph, but Jonah Goldberg (I know it hurts), and, I'm guessing by the fact that they live in "flophouses" the other bloggers described in the article, seem to fit the type. You're very smart, no doubt, but at 34 with a wife and a baby on the way, I know that I didn't know a thing when I was a 26 year-old shut-in, and I'm glad in retrospect that I didn't have any influence.

Posted by TheOtherCyrus | March 10, 2008 12:00 PM

You should try hydrogardening. Plants are your friends.

Posted by Linus | March 10, 2008 12:33 PM

OK, that picture's not doing anyone any favors and the article has more than a few cringe-worthy moments, but as someone who's never had a blog & knows these boys a bit, they're not nearly as pathetic as the article suggests. I've been to parties at their houses over the years with booze, dancing, flesh-and-blood females, a variety of non-blogger people, and nary a computer in sight. The shocker is that the gently rounded sweethearts have been known to charm ladies - I know middle couch guy dated a super-attractive girl for years - and none of them are nerds of the mouth-breathing, unable-to-interact-with-the-outside-world, cackling-at-their-own-Monty-Python quotes variety. Nerdy, absolutely... just not quite as hopeless and stunted as made to appear. And no, I wasn't commissioned to contribute this stirring defense.

Posted by Evangeline | March 10, 2008 12:36 PM

Is that a bong in the upper left hand corner?

Posted by Pat | March 10, 2008 1:10 PM

Honestyly I thought the same thing as Pat.

Posted by Peter K. | March 10, 2008 3:17 PM