Solid professional sources. All the specifics are in the article I linked to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvO1xELHp3k

Dukakis may have had a similar central message of pragmatic, good-governance, but he did nothing beyond stake out positions that he expected people to be drawn to. Obama, on the other hand, works very hard at making the big-picture argument to persuade bipartisanship instead of heading straight for the details. This is where the style-(emphasis)-over-substance approach pays dividends (think Reagan).

But most important of all, the current White House occupant has presided over an unpopular war, a stuttering economy that is leading to some pretty scary inflationary pressures, and the destruction of a major portion of an American city (New Orleans, that is). When solid Republican districts in Mississippi and Louisiana go Democratic, we shouldn't be looking to 20-year-old comparisons.

In a post-2008 nut-left USA, neither kind of commercial would be allowed and Dunkin' Donuts and donuts of all kinds would be illegal if not heavily taxed.

Well, only because it's true. The real question is, how far left does America want to go this round”

That's it, completely. Bush-hatred is pathological (diseased) but the rest of us are largely disappointed or worse with things and a Democratic victory is expected. The only question is how far left we really want to go. The young and the childish are foolish to expect another 1993. If it were to happen, the nation needs and is likely to get another 1994. The vacuous (factually and morally) will again be shocked.

There is no “progressive majority” as falsely claimed by the extreme site Alter[-]Net.

The US public is much more conservative than elites in government, media, and academia (and their camp followers), as well as than naive, often childish youth.
The Pew scale is better than any extreme source like Alter[-]Net, Chomsky, etc.

http://bp0.blogger.com/_KU_qLvOMe_s/R5Dwdil8YyI...

Absolutely. FIrst and foremost, the word “dud” comes to mind, followed by the phrase “sacrificial lamb” for those who demand more Com-plex-i-ty and Nu-ance.

I think a lot of people would not object to that scene, but be amused by it.

http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/article/...

http://www.historyplace.com/kennedy/jfkpix/cbk-...

http://www.gogglesandglasses.com/blues_brothers...

http://www.b-29s-over-korea.com/General_MacArth...

how far left does America want to go this round

I think there's actually a huge misconception about the values of everyday Americans. Truth is, we are surprisingly liberal. But the terms “liberal” and “left” have been co-opted as runasim says, and defined by the opponents of liberalism, a group that truly no longer deserves to be called “conservative.”

A few tidbits from the polls, linked to above and here:

Americans who believe government should guarantee every citizen enough to eat and a place to sleep is 69 percent

69 percent of self-identified Republicans — 75 percent of small-business owners! — favor raising the minimum wage by more than $2

53 percent think unions help the economy and only 36 percent think they hurt.

Only 25 percent want to see Roe v. Wade overturned

The public rejects government-funded abstinence-only sex education in favor of “more comprehensive sex education programs that include information on how to obtain and use condoms and other contraceptives” by 67 percent to 30 percent.

67 percent of Americans favor “diplomatic and economic efforts over military efforts in fighting terrorism.”

“Amnesty”? Sixty-two percent say undocumented immigrants should be allowed to “keep their jobs and eventually apply for legal status.”

Only 10 percent want laws controlling firearms to be less strict

Nearly two-thirds think corporate profits are too high

And the number one reason we'll have a major change in 2008:

When you compare Americans who either identify themselves as Democrats or say they lean toward the Democrats, Dems win by fifteen points, 50 percent to 35, the most by far in twenty years. As recently as 2002 it was a tie, 43 to 43.

Being fast and firm in responding to slime without becoming equally slimy is a highwire act on a very high wire and without any safety net.

Obstruction #1 is already seen in how 'liberal' is always used as an insult, not a description. Liberal leaning politicans are always and without exception porttrayed as the Far Left with zero degrees of separation. Complete socialism is the subtext.
Conservatives, however, are granted any number of gradations and type-descriptives. There are economic conservatives, social conservatives, religious conservatives, moderate conservatives, Bush conservatives, and on and on.

It's a very aggressive but subtle game of language co-option, much harder,to combat than overt mud shots.

The Left ' is stupid to fall for the word games. .
For example since there is no pro-death movement, it's ridiculous that the 'pro-life' language has been adopted by even those who oppose it.
Since I can't envision a major speech on the subject of language, this is a major vulnerability for Obama and all non-conservatives.

There was not nearly enough reaction to the portrayal of 'losing one's bearings' as having anything to do with age. It's actually an expression referring to navigtion, losing one's sense of direction. Instead, losing one's marbles was substituted as a synonym and few noticed to raise the alarm.

It's going to be very tough,. I hope,that, for once, the country has smartened up enough to not fall for games and gimmicks and will stick to real issues and ideas, instead.

There is no question that the Republicans will try to do to Obama what they did to Dukakis: paint him as a liberal, out of touch with the values of average (white) Americans, so far left that he has left America.

And they wouldn't do this with Clinton?

If you'd replace Kennedy with Nixon–who ran on national tickets five times, counting his VP runs–you could go all the way back to 1952, with only a gap in 1964.

Add on Dewey and Roosevelt, you'd cover most of the 20th century.

Well, only because it's true. The real question is, how far left does America want to go this round, as determined by the great state vote sweep?

I keep hoping some year for a candidate I can vote for, instead of against. But it looks like I might get one of my wishes this time. A prez ballot with no Bush, Clinton, Kennedy, or Dole on it! The first in my voting lifetime.

Since McCain's wife has significantly more money than Elizabeth Dole, I doubt that McCain will not be making in commercials. But McCain has the same level of disinterest in being president.

Does that describe Obama at all? I think not. He has routinely countered such efforts by his opponents with a style that is moderate in tone yet “take the bull by the horns” in directness. I have serious doubts about the GOP's ability to distract us from the ongoing mess they've made this time around. But anything's possible. They are VERY good at playing that game and we the people have shown a particular susceptibility to it in the past.

Actually, if Dukakis had faced the situation that Obama does he might well have won.