Here we go... again, I expect Obama to get a sizable national bump in the polls over McCain during the coming weeks. As to VP, I don't see it being Hillary... both on Obama's message and his electoral strengths. The Ticket does not need someone from the NE but would do well to pick someone from VA, NC, or the Mountain West... keep pushing the Repubs further into deepest Dixie until it's clear there's only one national party left.
The problem is not we have two party and only one of them is good. The problem is there should be a third or fourth party to compete against these two traditional parties. I for one would want a social liberal fiscal conservative party.
Why do Obama supporters keep trying to short-circuit the race? Are you racing to win, or just run the clock out? After KY and WV, Hillary will have the popular vote lead. Guess Barack is just tired of campaigning... There are quite a few bitter typical white people out there still left to vote... chickenschitt move by Obama if you ask me. Indicates weakness..
I know this won't play well here and that's fine, but I greatly disagree that Clinton doesn't help his electoral strength. The labels of NE, VA, NC and West are outdated and pale in comparison to the Clinton name and her campaign. She energized millions and millions of voters for months, and Obama's primary weakness is appealing to middle class whites in rural areas. She can and has delivered those voters in droves, and has done so all over the country. The potential benefit, nationwide, from that far outweighs the traditional region-based pick. Whether it's fair or unfair, the perception is that Clinton has more policy experience and more substance to her material -- another perceived Obama weakness. For the life of me, I can't understand her being different from his "message" -- you can't find two candidates more similarly aligned. The problem with the debates, as Obama has said, has been finding subjects on which they actually disagree. If both Obama and Clinton can swallow their respective egos, I think the ticket makes a lot of sense from a political and electoral perspective. Yes, I know I'll get flamed, but I wanted to say my piece.
What does that mean basso? I'm referencing an Obama campaign source and offering my opinion on VPs and general electoral/political strategy. There were no personal attacks and certainly no reason for your "fix." If I were TJ, I'd report you, but I've been called worse and I've even deserved it at times. The fact is the GOP is no longer competitive in the NE... it is now a solidly Dem region. The fact is the Pacific Coast (Alaska not included) is a solid Dem region. The fact is the Mountain West is trending Dem. The Midwest is trending Dem. This is the first time in forever that a majority in the House of Representatives does not depend on a majority of southerners. You can thank W and cronies for obliterating the Republican brand... even Newt says you face cataclysmic defeat if the the current trends continue. And since politics ain't beanbag, the Dems would be stupid not to do everything they can to further reduce the GOP pool of support and isolate the remnants as much as possible. The GOP is losing districts specifically redistricted to provide additional strength... and losing 40 points between 2006 and 2008. As to the comment about additional parties, there's nothing in US history that suggests a credible third party will emerge for an extended period. One may take the place of a current party or pop up briefly before their issues are coopted by one of the larger parties, but a credible, long-lasting third party is probably not going to happen. What I hope happens is that the GOP gets crushed so badly that they are forced to remake the party and emerge as a party well within the American tradition instead of what we have now. Of course, that would entail purging the current leadership and reshaping the philosophy and practices of the party...
You heard him, you yellow belly. The move of talking about the general election is pure chickenchitt. What are you going to do about it, you lilly livered, chicken? edit: I should add that basso fixed you good, man.
I wouldn't be surprised if Hillary wanted to be Obama's veep, but that would be a huge mistake and blow his credibility about "change" out of the water. There are any number of other choices that could strengthen the Dem ticket at least as much without her planeload of baggage. Choosing her would be like tying a millstone around his neck. She would give the GOP another huge target to demonize and distract from the debate on real issues.
The race is over. It's been over for awhile. We were only waiting to see if Hillary could get lucky with a streak of wild three pointers, but Obama played solid ball and made his free throws. As to the popular vote, what are you thinking? Even if you include FL and Michigan (where Obama was not on the ballot) for Hillary she still trails by 92,000 votes. She's not making that up in WV and if you looked at the primary calendar, you'd realize KY is the same day as OR, which will go to Obama. Plus, the race is over. People will realize that and come over to Obama in larger numbers. She may very well win in WV and KY, but it won't change anything. And by the way, weren't you crowing after PA that Hillary had the popular vote lead? Now you can only say she will have it. This difference, plus the math machinations you have to use just to get there should give you pause. And Obama is tired of campaigning? Where did you get that? the article says he will campaign in more places. Here's reality for you TJ: Obama will win the popular vote, will win the most states, will win the delegate count, will be the Democratic nominee for President, and will be the next President of the United States.
I agree with you up until that last part. He could win the general election, but he's gonna have a much harder time after Hillary bloodied him up. The Rev. Wright and "bitter" remarks will haunt him until November. Oh, and it won't help matters when he has to drop the "hope and change" routine and actually start talking about his plans for this country. When he doesn't have a prepared speech in front of him, he's a lousy speaker.
I think American voters will understand that the war, the economy, and the Constitution are more important than Rev. Wright. And I disagree about the bloodied up part. The extended primary season has forced Obama to organize in every state... something no modern Dem nominee has ever done. That organization will pay off well in the fall. It has also hardened him off a little and made him a better candidate.
Hence the second part of my post. Once he actually has to start talking about his plans for the war and the economy, the lack of experience will be glaring. When he tried to discuss capital gains taxes in the last debate, he sounded like a complete moron.
This is what I don't get. Answer me this: Are you saying that Hillary and McCain have laid out their plans clearly and Obama has not? If so, you are mistaken. He has been every bit as specific (if not more) than either. In fact, so far, McCain has been more vague than anybody. IMO, Obama is being held to a different standard regarding specifics by many people and I can't figure out exactly why.
I will say this, hillary will get into specifics, her problem was she would be for anything that was popular
Obama can't get into specifics because he would confuse his audience. They need one-word, one-syllable marketing slogans. Anything more would represent INFORMATION OVERLOAD
