Bob and Chez Show

The Bubble Genius Bob & Chez Show 11/8/12

Our Election Recap; President Obama Re-elected; Dean Chambers Blames Bob for His Attack on Nate Silver; The Moneyball Election; Fox News Fights Itself; Rove Crapped His Pants; Republicans Will Never Become More Moderate; Republican Tokenism; and much more. Brought to you by Bubble Genius!

There's more election talk in this week's After Party including Bob's prediction for the election on Friday at Noon eastern time. If you're not a member, subscribe already. Only $6/month, cancel any time.

Listen and subscribe on iTunes (it's FREE!)
Download the mp3 (55 minutes, 23mb)
RSS Feed
Listen on your smartphone via

Bubble Genius

  • BTW, I love your show. I work in a very small open cubicle office with all male colleagues who sit around burping and farting all day. Headphones and great podcasts like yours are saving my sanity. FSM bless you.

  • muselet

    “Portly”? Dean Chambers (“the Meat Loaf of polling” is absolutely brilliant, Chez) got annoyed about being called “portly”? Good dog in Himmel, he is portly, and using that supposed grave insult as an excuse to call Nate Silver names is the weirdest case of displaced aggression I’ve ever heard of.

    On the one hand, the Moneyball strategy can overcome the brute force of unlimited money and so is a good thing. On the other hand, further subdividing the population makes it possible to miss opportunities to pick up voters in unlikely places—which the 50-state strategy does—and so is a bad thing. And on the third hand, in four years the country will be lousy with campaign consultants, each of which will employ a batallion of laptop-wielding junior accountants and each of which will claim particular expertise in implementing the winning Moneyball strategy, which will be both hilarious and tragic.

    Karl Rove fell for his own line of patter and gulled himself. I never had much respect for Rove, but I thought he was a good enough con man to avoid such a simple blunder. (I would pay good money to know what was being screamed into Megyn Kelly and Bret Baier’s earpieces while Rove was having his little on-air episode. Maybe the two of them are bright enough to get the focus off Rove on their own, maybe not. Don’t know, don’t care. It made for good entertainment either way.)

    My money says the Rs won’t bother with introspection or self-doubt. It’s not the sort of thing they do. What they will do is become even more intransigent and ever more dependent on Lindsey Graham’s angry white men. (Oh, for crying out.… Get your mind out of the gutter, that’s not what I meant and you know it!)

    Bob, you have it exactly right: in order to appeal to a larger percentage of the population, the Rs will have to abandon some—or many—policies and positions that have defined the party. I don’t think that’ll happen now. If the Rs lose big in 2014, maybe; more likely if they get shellacked in ’16. And even if they were to change, it would take several years for any of the targeted groups (women, Latinos, gays, non-Christians, blacks, et bleedin’ cetera) to trust the Republicans.

    Marco Rubio wouldn’t change the dynamic for the Rs one little bit. Latinos are as diverse as any other group in the US, but by and large Latinos are far to the Left of Rubio (for that matter, so is the whole country—center-right nation, my eye).

    “All Boehner’s interested in is keeping his job.” True, but if John Boehner moves—or tries to move the party—even the slightest bit away from the far Right, his caucus will eat him alive (and that may well not be a metaphor). He may personally be willing to concede that reality is, well, reality, but the rest of the House Rs, not so much. Boehner is also a canny enough politician to know that Eric Cantor would cheerfully stick a knife in his back and twist, and Cantor will charge full-tilt off the cliff with the herd. Sometimes I feel a little bit sorry for John Boehner, but I get over it quickly enough.

    As the (mythical) Chinese proverb says, may you live in interesting times.


    • mrbrink

      That was so very fine.

    • Hispanics ARE very diverse. Spanish, a lifelong purusit, was my minor in college and I had the chance to interact with many Hispanics in my lifetime. The gay prof who fled Argentina because of the very conservative, rural and Catholic nature of that society being literally dangerous for him. The young TA from Madrid who spoke with a Castillian accent–she was a hippy through and through. My ex father in law, arrived from Cuba at 14, raised by very strict Christians in SC but as liberal as I am but very different from his bros and sisters who live in Miami. Then add into the mixture the American children of Hispanic Immigrants….the Mexican Americans in AZ, actually very politically active, demonstrating and standing up to the BS here. These young kids will not have adopted the strict Catholicism of their parents (generally speaking). And as we’ve noted they are “out birthing” us white folks. Indeed the median age of the Hispanic population in 2012 was 27 years. This compared with 41 years for whites and 39.6 for all groups combined. Add in all that and yes, you have a large and growing larger group of diverse, but more likely to be, liberals. Republicans have a long, long road to hoe with this population.