I would have written about the events of this week sooner, but I just recently got back to my room after several days walking on clouds. Our long national nightmare is about to come to an end. The split that many (including myself) predicted for the May 6 primaries came true, but not in the expected fashion. Barack Obama blew out the North Carolina primary by about 220,000 votes while Hillary Clinton won the Indiana contest by only 15,000, essentially a draw in a contest with over 1.2 million votes. Obama's performances came off a week where his ex-pastor stole most of the headlines, his opposition tried to paint him as an elitist that couldn't gain the support of working families, and his rival tried touting a pandering, irresponsible plan to suspend gas taxes for the summer.
It didn't work. Voters turned off the Clinton spin machine and turned on to the man who will be the Democratic nominee. And I know that Obama will be the nominee because Tim Russert told me so. That particular clip has gotten a lot of play online these last few days, and I was watching him live when he said it. That was the first time I really thought to myself, "Wow, this is finally going to end soon, maybe tomorrow." Obama and his message were able to overcome all the extraneous BS, and voters want this process to end.
Well, as we know, Clinton hasn't stopped, and she has continued campaigning hard in the upcoming states of West Virginia (primary next Tuesday), Oregon and Kentucky (primaries May 20). Instead of running a clean, valedictory campaign, Clinton and her lackeys have continued bitching about Michigan and Florida, playing the race card, and even making ridiculous claims about counting Puerto Rico in the even more ridiculous popular vote metric. At first I thought this was because she badly wants to make something out of her failed campaign and lobby for a spot on the ticket. But after making comments in Oregon today criticizing Obama's health care plan as if this was January, I'm really at a loss for what she's going for.
She now has to gain around 70 percent of all remaining delegates to get to the magic number of 2,025. There's only six contests left, and the most delegates at stake in any of them is 55. It's stupid to assume that when the DNC decides the fate of the Florida and Michigan delegates May 31 they're going to assign those delegates based solely on the votes of those illegal contests. Since Tuesday, Obama has picked up 13 superdelegate endorsements while Clinton has a net gain of 0 (two new endorsements and two defections to Obama). According to our friends at 2008 Democratic Convention Watch, Obama only needs 1.5 more superdelegate endorsements to finally overtake Clinton's once vast lead. Even Rahm Emanuel, the 4th-ranking Democrat in the House and one of Bill Clinton's closest advisers during his presidency, when the Russert route today and called Obama "the presumptive nominee." I'll say that Clinton has every right to stay in this race until someone hits 2,025, or more realistically, the 1,627 majority in pledged delegates that Obama should clinch with a win in Oregon (it's being suggested he will declare victory that night). Clinton is assured to win in WV and KY but there won't be enough delegates to catch up after 5/20.
So I'm still at a loss about what all this means. Besides it being her general right to stay in the race until Obama gets certain majorities, she's definitely doing more damage than good by staying in and raising consistent concerns about his electablity, especially when she disgustingly suggests Obama can't win "white voters." There's no reason to believe that she'll go back on her word of offering 100% support to whomever the Democratic nominee is. When she's in that position this summer and fall, she's going to be the one to try and convince "white voters" to come over to Obama. I wish that was the approach she was taking. Instead she's continuing to try and splinter the party and hurt everyone in the process. If her campaign tries to say that winning most of WV's whopping 28 delegates is a game-changer, then I don't think I'm going to take anything they say seriously until she says the words "Barack Obama will be our next president."
The fighting has already begun between Obama and John McCain, an awesome battle that I'm ready to observe with the greatest of fervor for the next five months. Obama gave a speech today where he never once mentioned Clinton and pointed all his verbal missiles at the man from Arizona. I don't know that we've ever had a campaign where the two major candidates were so different in so many respects. A brash upstart versus the (literally) old guard, a 25-year age discrepancy, and almost entirely different ideas about where the country should go. It goes without saying that the 2008 general election should be an epic battle. Of course, all Obama has to ask people is whether or not they want a third Bush term, because that's what they'd get with McCain. Maybe it won't be so close in the end.
Have a good weekend.
Friday, May 9, 2008
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Pennsylvania Fallout and Looking Head
Last night Hillary Clinton predictably won the Pennsylvania Democratic primary by a predictable margin of nine percentage points (not the 10 or "double-digit" victory many media outlets have irresponsibly reported since last night). None of us Obama supporters should be upset that he lost, but I'm rather disappointed that he couldn't pull the margin within five to undercut whatever argument Clinton had going forward. Instead, the Clinton campaign has been re-energized and Hillary's public begging for money has apparently worked. The campaign has said the expect to have $10 million raised since last night by the end of tonight. If money was going to be the biggest problem going forward for Hillary, it sure won't be anymore.
I'm going to continue to allow the media to go insane about Obama's loss and ask ad nauseum "Why can't he close the deal? What's wrong with the guy?" Instead, what I'll do is take a reasonable approach to explaining why Pennsylvania was never good for Obama to begin with and why even getting it to nine or ten points was relatively impressive. Let's go bullet-points for this one:
Now the candidates are going to be slogging it out for the next two weeks in North Carolina and Indiana. The race in North Carolina is not expected to be competitive; given the high number of blacks and the more upper-class makeup of the states Democratic voters, I'd say Obama should win by 15-20 points and personally I don't see the point in Clinton even bothering to campaign there at all. The true battleground becomes Indiana, the typically-Red home of Dick Lugar and many other prominent conservative politicians. There are advantages here for both Clinton and Obama. Indiana borders Illinois, and much of the TV outlets in the northern part of the state come out of Chicago, meaning they are already very familiar with Obama. The demographics do favor Clinton slightly and she has the support of the uber-popular Indiana moderate Senator Evan Bayh. This sets the stage for what will certainly be a hard-fought two-week battle, and if Obama can win both states and suck the Clinton campaign dry of money, this race may finally end.
But I'm not counting on it.
I'm going to continue to allow the media to go insane about Obama's loss and ask ad nauseum "Why can't he close the deal? What's wrong with the guy?" Instead, what I'll do is take a reasonable approach to explaining why Pennsylvania was never good for Obama to begin with and why even getting it to nine or ten points was relatively impressive. Let's go bullet-points for this one:
- The makeup of the state's demographics favored Clinton heavily. Basically everything about the state and particularly the white voters made a Clinton victory a foregone conclusion. There were factors at work here that wouldn't have made it possible for Abraham Lincoln to beat Clinton in this state, let alone the Land of Lincolner. Pennsylvania is the third-oldest state in the country (behind Florida and whatever state John McCain happen to be in), and Clinton has dominated the vote amongst seniors in virtually every contest thus far. Clinton also polls well amongst all women, Catholics, and the white working class, and the results in PA showed her strength there once again. For Obama, the higher-educated and younger voters he's needed to win never materialized in a state where we really couldn't expect them to appear. He cleaned up in Philadelphia and its suburbs but those were the only areas in the entire state that jibed with Obama's strengths.
- This is something the media has almost entirely ignored in its analysis of this primary: yesterday's contest was a closed Democratic primary. People who wanted to vote in this primary needed to change their party affiliation to Democratic before a certain date last month, otherwise they'd be turned away at the polls. I am saying this because the primary rules shut out independents and disaffected Republicans from participating, and those have been key groups to Obama's success in several primaries to this point. So when the Clinton campaign and some conservatives go on the airwaves and say things like "If Obama can't beat Clinton and connect with the blue-collar voters in this primary, what does that say about his chances against McCain?" just remember this primary was NOT like the general election and Obama has been effective in courting voters needed for success in November. As David Axelrod told NPR today, white working-class voters have voted Republican in significant numbers the last two general elections anyway.
- Clinton had the backing in Pennsylvania of Governor Ed Rendell and his vast Democratic political machine. It didn't take long once it was discovered that Pennsylvania would have a say in the process for a large majority of local Democratic politicians (including the mayors of both Pittsburgh and Philadelphia) to come to Hillary's side in this race. Rendell is a larger-than-life figure in the Keystone state and his influence likely swayed these politicians to Clinton. By not having this organization advantage, Obama could not have hoped to win.
Now the candidates are going to be slogging it out for the next two weeks in North Carolina and Indiana. The race in North Carolina is not expected to be competitive; given the high number of blacks and the more upper-class makeup of the states Democratic voters, I'd say Obama should win by 15-20 points and personally I don't see the point in Clinton even bothering to campaign there at all. The true battleground becomes Indiana, the typically-Red home of Dick Lugar and many other prominent conservative politicians. There are advantages here for both Clinton and Obama. Indiana borders Illinois, and much of the TV outlets in the northern part of the state come out of Chicago, meaning they are already very familiar with Obama. The demographics do favor Clinton slightly and she has the support of the uber-popular Indiana moderate Senator Evan Bayh. This sets the stage for what will certainly be a hard-fought two-week battle, and if Obama can win both states and suck the Clinton campaign dry of money, this race may finally end.
But I'm not counting on it.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
The "Bitter" Truth
Since it's the weekend, the most recent political firestorm may have been missed by many. On Friday afternoon, a story on liberal blog Huffington Post appeared about comments made by Barack Obama to a group of donors in San Francisco. I'll get more into the context later, but when prompted about the cultural divide in America, Obama said this:
"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Since this story broke, both the Clinton and McCain campaigns have gone heavily on the offensive while there's been some serious explaining by Obama and his surrogates. Clinton has already gone into the full-court press, telling crowds in Indiana that America "doesn't need a president who looks down on them." McCain, predictably, has painted Obama as an "elitist liberal" the same way George Bush tarnished John Kerry in 2004. For his part, Obama really hasn't backed off the comments, only saying that he "didn't say it as well as I should have" and he feels "deep regret" if people found his comments offensive. Check this out to see his full remarks from a rally in Muncie, Indiana Saturday. One can expect this to be the topic of conversation on the Sunday shows and heading into this important final week before the Pennsylvania primary, which includes an ABC debate in Philadelphia Wednesday.
I feel pretty qualified to deal with this topic, since I come from a middle-class background but I've been around people in my life from the top of the economic ladder and the very bottom. As an observer who's taken a long, hard look at his country not just because of this important election but because I'm coming close to heading out into that country on my own, I look at Obama's comments and I see nothing that misses the mark. I'd agree that it's dangerous to equate economic hardships with 2nd Amendment guarantees and religious devotion, but on the face I think Obama was right on in his assessment of what's happening in small towns.
My hometown of Bartlett, New Hampshire and the neighboring villages in the Valley qualify as "small town America" but, interestingly enough, it's one of the few rural places in America that isn't experiencing economic woes. Because of the ample snowfall the Valley had one of its best winters in recent memory, but how high gas prices will affect summer business remains to be seen. While unemployment levels rise all across the country, it can be reasonably stated that in the Valley if you are over the age of 14 and don't have a job it's because you're either 1. an idiot, 2. incredibly lazy, or 3. disabled in some other way.
The quality of that job, however, is always a concern. I think it can also be reasonably stated that because of the makeup of the Valley's economy and its reliance on service jobs, it can be hard for people who aren't in business ownership or management to get by. This is where we see the erosion of the middle class. The purchasing power and personal economic comfort that middle class-members experienced in the Valley 10 or 15 years ago have gone away as their wages have stayed roughly the same. When political candidates talk about restoring the middle class, this is what they mean. While there used to be people at the top, middle and bottom, now there's people at the top and people who used to be in the middle getting sucked into the bottom.
As I said, people in the Valley are lucky because there's no shortage of actual jobs. In places like Pennsylvania, Indiana and Ohio as Obama spoke of, Americans are losing industrial jobs that, as Obama realistically points out on the campaign trail, aren't coming back. I'll be returning to the Red Parka Pub to work this summer, and I feel pretty safe that my job waiting tables won't be outsourced to New Delhi.
The long and short of this is that Barack Obama is right in his comments, and he shouldn't back off them. People are without a doubt bitter about losing their jobs, the economic downturn, the war in Iraq, and the overall humiliation of George Bush's White House tenure. When these people get bitter, they "cling" to the things they can justify being devoted to, like religion and firearms, and hate things they may not understand or like on the social level. It's not just immigration or trade deals, but things like gay marriage or abortion that they get passionate about. It's not like Obama made these claims up out of thin air. As I mentioned in my last Musing, Obama spend six days getting down and dirty with the rural folks in Pennsylvania. Obama is a gifted listener, and this is what people told him. So when liberal donors in California wanted to know about what goes through the minds of rural Pennsylvanians, he told those donors the truth. He started a dialog about it. He sees it as a problem, and promises to lead the fight to find a solution. The other campaigns, and to a certain extent the media, have misconstrued these comments as being divisive when in my opinion this is yet another example of Obama expressing a deep understanding of the American people that most average politicians miss. The negative controversy of him saying that people in America are "bitter" is not his opinion, it's a statement of fact.
Much like the negative backlash that some gave him after his race speech last month, Barack Obama is being lambasted all across the political landscape for doing what he does best: Telling the truth to get people talking about important issues. He gets criticized for doing what politicians should be doing. Now that's something to be bitter about.
The most disingenuous thing to come out of this is the reaction from Hillary Clinton and her camp (I know, big surprise). They have called Obama's remarks "condescending," "damaging," "small-minded," "elitist," and "out of touch." Worst and most astonishing of all, Hillary seems convinced that people she's met on the campaign trail are not "bitter" about what's happened in America and its direction going forward. How is that possible? Do Clinton campaign lackeys hand out happy pills to everyone in the crowd before her speeches? Does she emit some paranormal scent that makes former factory workers in Indiana and Pennsylvania forget about how much their lives suck whenever they talk to her? And where does she get off calling Obama "elitist" when her tax records show she and Bill made $109 million since they left the White House? Seriously, I want an explanation. How pathetic are the people wearing "I'm Not Bitter!" pins at Hillary rallies today? Is that the best they could think of on short notice? If you hate Hillary as much as I do, see if you can sit through her speech on Obama's comments from Saturday without X-ing out of the window before it ends. Do your worst.
Make no mistake: Obama is definitely in a pickle, and he needs to tread smartly going forward, which I have no doubt he will do. He had been quietly gaining ground on Clinton in recent Pennsylvania polls, with this Zogby poll showing just a 4-point advantage for Clinton with 10 percent still undecided. Many had predicted Obama would be leading in the polls by the end of this coming week, but those predictions must go on hold for now. Clinton is certain to fire up the spin machine even more this week, and luckily there will be a debate Wednesday that is certain to provide Obama with a chance to really talk to people in Pennsylvania about this and other important issues. I believe Hillary will win on April 22 but the margin won't be enough to give her a significant push in delegates.
And if Obama doesn't win, at least he has a Jedi on his side.
"You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Since this story broke, both the Clinton and McCain campaigns have gone heavily on the offensive while there's been some serious explaining by Obama and his surrogates. Clinton has already gone into the full-court press, telling crowds in Indiana that America "doesn't need a president who looks down on them." McCain, predictably, has painted Obama as an "elitist liberal" the same way George Bush tarnished John Kerry in 2004. For his part, Obama really hasn't backed off the comments, only saying that he "didn't say it as well as I should have" and he feels "deep regret" if people found his comments offensive. Check this out to see his full remarks from a rally in Muncie, Indiana Saturday. One can expect this to be the topic of conversation on the Sunday shows and heading into this important final week before the Pennsylvania primary, which includes an ABC debate in Philadelphia Wednesday.
I feel pretty qualified to deal with this topic, since I come from a middle-class background but I've been around people in my life from the top of the economic ladder and the very bottom. As an observer who's taken a long, hard look at his country not just because of this important election but because I'm coming close to heading out into that country on my own, I look at Obama's comments and I see nothing that misses the mark. I'd agree that it's dangerous to equate economic hardships with 2nd Amendment guarantees and religious devotion, but on the face I think Obama was right on in his assessment of what's happening in small towns.
My hometown of Bartlett, New Hampshire and the neighboring villages in the Valley qualify as "small town America" but, interestingly enough, it's one of the few rural places in America that isn't experiencing economic woes. Because of the ample snowfall the Valley had one of its best winters in recent memory, but how high gas prices will affect summer business remains to be seen. While unemployment levels rise all across the country, it can be reasonably stated that in the Valley if you are over the age of 14 and don't have a job it's because you're either 1. an idiot, 2. incredibly lazy, or 3. disabled in some other way.
The quality of that job, however, is always a concern. I think it can also be reasonably stated that because of the makeup of the Valley's economy and its reliance on service jobs, it can be hard for people who aren't in business ownership or management to get by. This is where we see the erosion of the middle class. The purchasing power and personal economic comfort that middle class-members experienced in the Valley 10 or 15 years ago have gone away as their wages have stayed roughly the same. When political candidates talk about restoring the middle class, this is what they mean. While there used to be people at the top, middle and bottom, now there's people at the top and people who used to be in the middle getting sucked into the bottom.
As I said, people in the Valley are lucky because there's no shortage of actual jobs. In places like Pennsylvania, Indiana and Ohio as Obama spoke of, Americans are losing industrial jobs that, as Obama realistically points out on the campaign trail, aren't coming back. I'll be returning to the Red Parka Pub to work this summer, and I feel pretty safe that my job waiting tables won't be outsourced to New Delhi.
The long and short of this is that Barack Obama is right in his comments, and he shouldn't back off them. People are without a doubt bitter about losing their jobs, the economic downturn, the war in Iraq, and the overall humiliation of George Bush's White House tenure. When these people get bitter, they "cling" to the things they can justify being devoted to, like religion and firearms, and hate things they may not understand or like on the social level. It's not just immigration or trade deals, but things like gay marriage or abortion that they get passionate about. It's not like Obama made these claims up out of thin air. As I mentioned in my last Musing, Obama spend six days getting down and dirty with the rural folks in Pennsylvania. Obama is a gifted listener, and this is what people told him. So when liberal donors in California wanted to know about what goes through the minds of rural Pennsylvanians, he told those donors the truth. He started a dialog about it. He sees it as a problem, and promises to lead the fight to find a solution. The other campaigns, and to a certain extent the media, have misconstrued these comments as being divisive when in my opinion this is yet another example of Obama expressing a deep understanding of the American people that most average politicians miss. The negative controversy of him saying that people in America are "bitter" is not his opinion, it's a statement of fact.
Much like the negative backlash that some gave him after his race speech last month, Barack Obama is being lambasted all across the political landscape for doing what he does best: Telling the truth to get people talking about important issues. He gets criticized for doing what politicians should be doing. Now that's something to be bitter about.
The most disingenuous thing to come out of this is the reaction from Hillary Clinton and her camp (I know, big surprise). They have called Obama's remarks "condescending," "damaging," "small-minded," "elitist," and "out of touch." Worst and most astonishing of all, Hillary seems convinced that people she's met on the campaign trail are not "bitter" about what's happened in America and its direction going forward. How is that possible? Do Clinton campaign lackeys hand out happy pills to everyone in the crowd before her speeches? Does she emit some paranormal scent that makes former factory workers in Indiana and Pennsylvania forget about how much their lives suck whenever they talk to her? And where does she get off calling Obama "elitist" when her tax records show she and Bill made $109 million since they left the White House? Seriously, I want an explanation. How pathetic are the people wearing "I'm Not Bitter!" pins at Hillary rallies today? Is that the best they could think of on short notice? If you hate Hillary as much as I do, see if you can sit through her speech on Obama's comments from Saturday without X-ing out of the window before it ends. Do your worst.
Make no mistake: Obama is definitely in a pickle, and he needs to tread smartly going forward, which I have no doubt he will do. He had been quietly gaining ground on Clinton in recent Pennsylvania polls, with this Zogby poll showing just a 4-point advantage for Clinton with 10 percent still undecided. Many had predicted Obama would be leading in the polls by the end of this coming week, but those predictions must go on hold for now. Clinton is certain to fire up the spin machine even more this week, and luckily there will be a debate Wednesday that is certain to provide Obama with a chance to really talk to people in Pennsylvania about this and other important issues. I believe Hillary will win on April 22 but the margin won't be enough to give her a significant push in delegates.
And if Obama doesn't win, at least he has a Jedi on his side.
Sunday, March 30, 2008
The Pennsylvania Race
Sorry I haven't been checking in recently, but it's almost like there's so much going on right now I can't even figure out what I should be commenting on. For this post, I'll step away from my continuous Hillary Clinton-bashing to talk about what the contest in Pennsylvania really means. We sit here a bit more than three weeks from the primary that will decide if the Democratic nomination fight lasts a bit longer or if Clinton will finally throw in the towel. It already feels like it's been forever since the Mississippi primary on March 11, and we still have a lot of time left to go before voters make their choice in the Keystone State.
And time is the prime ally of Barack Obama right now. Most recent polls show Clinton roughly 10 points ahead of Obama in PA with nearly the same amount undecided. While it's clear Obama should carry much of the eastern region around Philadelphia, other urban areas, and places like State College, Clinton definitely has an advantage in the western, rural, blue-collar areas. This area is where Obama is concentrating his week-long bus tour. By the looks of this picture, he's really getting into it.
Obama also elected to bring in Iowa campaign organizer to spearhead his PA effort. Obama is definitely hoping to regain some of that magic that put him on the road to this improbable nomination. By getting really getting down into those predominately-white, working class places and trying to intimately understand their issues, he can make better headway with this group who's support he seems to be lacking. This was the strategy that translated into victory back in December and January for Obama, and I don't see any reason why it won't work again. Getting the endorsement of Senator Bob Casey, a man who embodies much of the working class in the state, was a tremendous get for Obama and could possibly translate into more votes for him by itself.
I'm just hoping that Obama doesn't give up trying to win here. I don't think it's a foregone conclusion Clinton will take the contest and Obama's populist appeal should play well statewide. There's no reason why he can't win. The problem is that unless Obama wins the primary outright, there's no way Clinton drops out. I'm really hopeful Obama can put the kabbash on this whole thing so the Dems can start preparing for John McCain this fall.
That's all I've got.
And time is the prime ally of Barack Obama right now. Most recent polls show Clinton roughly 10 points ahead of Obama in PA with nearly the same amount undecided. While it's clear Obama should carry much of the eastern region around Philadelphia, other urban areas, and places like State College, Clinton definitely has an advantage in the western, rural, blue-collar areas. This area is where Obama is concentrating his week-long bus tour. By the looks of this picture, he's really getting into it.
Obama also elected to bring in Iowa campaign organizer to spearhead his PA effort. Obama is definitely hoping to regain some of that magic that put him on the road to this improbable nomination. By getting really getting down into those predominately-white, working class places and trying to intimately understand their issues, he can make better headway with this group who's support he seems to be lacking. This was the strategy that translated into victory back in December and January for Obama, and I don't see any reason why it won't work again. Getting the endorsement of Senator Bob Casey, a man who embodies much of the working class in the state, was a tremendous get for Obama and could possibly translate into more votes for him by itself.
I'm just hoping that Obama doesn't give up trying to win here. I don't think it's a foregone conclusion Clinton will take the contest and Obama's populist appeal should play well statewide. There's no reason why he can't win. The problem is that unless Obama wins the primary outright, there's no way Clinton drops out. I'm really hopeful Obama can put the kabbash on this whole thing so the Dems can start preparing for John McCain this fall.
That's all I've got.
Monday, March 10, 2008
The Spitzer Debacle, Veep Talk and More Clinton BS
Let me begin the second-ever Blue Musings post by commenting on the breaking news of today on the potential resignation of Democratic New York Governor Eliot Spitzer. In case you haven't heard, Governor Spitzer was caught through federal wiretapping to have arranged a meeting with a "high-priced" prostitute in D.C. last month. I'm not going to attempt to make jokes at the expense of Spitzer; I'll leave that to Jon Stewart and Jay Leno. What's sad here is that Spitzer had been highly touted throughout his career as being tough on crime, in particular white-collar criminals on Wall Street and organized crime throughout New York. Now we find out that Spitzer is connected to a prostitution ring. Just when we thought there was a chance hypocrisy and underhandedness was taking a backseat in American politics, we have one of the more incongruous scandals to rock American politics in some time. This just shows no matter what politics will be a dirty, hypocritical game regardless of what is trying to be sold to you to the contrary.
With that, this blog entry is off to an optimistic start. Can't you tell that you're just going to LOVE Blue Musings for the next eight months?
Let's turn to more disingenuous material, this time emanating from the Clinton campaign. Over the past couple of days the level of smugness and entitlement over the presidency has hit an all-time high. Both the former First Lady and the potential First Dude have suggested publicly that Barack Obama would be a great V.P., allowing voters to cast ballots for the "dream ticket." This comes following a week of Obama-bashing from the Clinton camp, during which they continued to claim that Obama wasn't ready to be president and their November rival John McCain was much better suited for the job.
Allow me to recap this: one week Obama isn't worthy to carry Hillary's jockstrap in terms of the "commander in chief threshold" (whatever the fuck that is), yet the next week the Clintons seem more than ready to anoint Obama as being the proverbial "one heartbeat away" in a hypothetical Clinton presidency. All this while Clinton is trailing Obama in states won, delegates earned, and popular votes cast. What word would you use to describe this behavior? Desperate? Arrogant? Psychotic? Idiotic? All, or some combination, of the above? Then, to top it all off, Clinton mouthpiece Howard Wolfson told reporters today that Obama isn't ready to be Veep because he hasn't met some other arbitrary experience threshold made up by the Clinton camp. However, Wolfson did say that Obama could reach that threshold by the Denver Convention.
As Smykowski asked in "Office Space," WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
The Clinton campaign has not only taken to contradicting themselves in this regard, but also displaying an astounding amount of hubris. Anybody with half a brain can see what they're attempting to accomplish here: They want to sway Obama voters and people on the fence towards them by suggesting that Obama would be part of a Clinton presidency. It's nothing more that a crock of shit. It doesn't even matter if Clinton offered Obama the #2 spot, there's no shot he'd accept it in the first place. Does anyone really think Obama would want to wallow in the most useless job in American government while playing second fiddle not to Hillary but Bill? Of course, if Hillary becomes the nominee (which she won't anyway), nobody should realistically expect Hillary to extend the Veep invitation to Obama anyway. And you can bet the farm and all the cows that Obama won't want anything to do with Hillary as his Veep when he's facing off with McCain this fall. That bridge was burned a considerable time ago. Watch Obama's deftly strong response to all this crap here.
So what's the point of all this? It's the Clinton strategy to deceive, misrepresent, and lie in desperation to get to the White House. I'm extremely hopeful the people yet to vote will be smart enough to see through this petty, misleading bullshit and let these raving lunatics go home before they can disrupt the glorious coronation of Barack Obama in Denver this August.
With that, I'm out. I'll be back whenever I damn well please.
With that, this blog entry is off to an optimistic start. Can't you tell that you're just going to LOVE Blue Musings for the next eight months?
Let's turn to more disingenuous material, this time emanating from the Clinton campaign. Over the past couple of days the level of smugness and entitlement over the presidency has hit an all-time high. Both the former First Lady and the potential First Dude have suggested publicly that Barack Obama would be a great V.P., allowing voters to cast ballots for the "dream ticket." This comes following a week of Obama-bashing from the Clinton camp, during which they continued to claim that Obama wasn't ready to be president and their November rival John McCain was much better suited for the job.
Allow me to recap this: one week Obama isn't worthy to carry Hillary's jockstrap in terms of the "commander in chief threshold" (whatever the fuck that is), yet the next week the Clintons seem more than ready to anoint Obama as being the proverbial "one heartbeat away" in a hypothetical Clinton presidency. All this while Clinton is trailing Obama in states won, delegates earned, and popular votes cast. What word would you use to describe this behavior? Desperate? Arrogant? Psychotic? Idiotic? All, or some combination, of the above? Then, to top it all off, Clinton mouthpiece Howard Wolfson told reporters today that Obama isn't ready to be Veep because he hasn't met some other arbitrary experience threshold made up by the Clinton camp. However, Wolfson did say that Obama could reach that threshold by the Denver Convention.
As Smykowski asked in "Office Space," WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE?
The Clinton campaign has not only taken to contradicting themselves in this regard, but also displaying an astounding amount of hubris. Anybody with half a brain can see what they're attempting to accomplish here: They want to sway Obama voters and people on the fence towards them by suggesting that Obama would be part of a Clinton presidency. It's nothing more that a crock of shit. It doesn't even matter if Clinton offered Obama the #2 spot, there's no shot he'd accept it in the first place. Does anyone really think Obama would want to wallow in the most useless job in American government while playing second fiddle not to Hillary but Bill? Of course, if Hillary becomes the nominee (which she won't anyway), nobody should realistically expect Hillary to extend the Veep invitation to Obama anyway. And you can bet the farm and all the cows that Obama won't want anything to do with Hillary as his Veep when he's facing off with McCain this fall. That bridge was burned a considerable time ago. Watch Obama's deftly strong response to all this crap here.
So what's the point of all this? It's the Clinton strategy to deceive, misrepresent, and lie in desperation to get to the White House. I'm extremely hopeful the people yet to vote will be smart enough to see through this petty, misleading bullshit and let these raving lunatics go home before they can disrupt the glorious coronation of Barack Obama in Denver this August.
With that, I'm out. I'll be back whenever I damn well please.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Welcome to Blue Musings
I want to welcome everyone to my latest blog, Blue Musings. I have created this blog as an outlet for my feelings, or musings, on the political action in this pivotal year of 2008. I know it probably seems like I'm late to the party but this was really an idea that just came to me. As you all know I keep another blog hosted here on Blogspot that is solely focused on baseball. I'm going to keep updating that as well (at some point I'll be getting to my AL West preview, probably during spring break). I really wanted to start something where I could get my feelings out about what's going on during this election year. I've always felt like I could write just as effectively about politics as sports, but like I mentioned many times on my old blog, the climate of American politics really just made me angry and I never felt the need to anger myself further by writing about it. Now, with George W. Bush set to exit office in 10 months, I'm ready to open myself up again on this topic. I hope very much you will find this blog informative, entertaining, and a good place to keep up on what is going on.
I chose to name this blog Blue Musings because, as many of you know, I am a registered Democrat. I've reached a point in my belief system that I don't really ever see myself voting for a Republican under any circumstances in any race. I blame this primarily on watching Bush and his lackey cohorts ruin America since 2000. People wonder why the campaign for the 2008 presidency started so early; I think it's pretty simple. All people, even Republicans, wanted nothing more than to move on from the hellish reign of Brainless the Second. It has been so funny to me during this election year to watch George Bush become such a non-factor to the American populace. It's almost as if Americans view the three people who could be the next president like they already are president. I never thought I'd ever see something like that, but that speaks to how unpopular the President is.
I guess the appearance of "Yes We Can" in my info is a dead giveaway about whom I am supporting this time around. I don't feel like I should have to defend Barack Obama or the reasons why I voted for him in the New Hampshire primary or why I'll vote for him in the general election (I'll get to my own personal Obama Inevitability argument later on). The most important factor that attracted me to Obama in the weeks leading up to the primary here was his inspirational nature of his candidacy. Republicans and supporters of Hillary Clinton like to call Obama soft on the issues (a complete misnomer if there ever was one), but it seems to be those people are missing out on the biggest aspect of Obama's appeal. There's something to be said for political figure that inspires the masses to be better citizens, to engage in the process, and to improve and CHANGE the timbre of this country. Obama is the only candidate that has that going for him, and it's a fairly short list of people historically who have had that (Jackson, Lincoln, TR, FDR, both the Kennedys and Reagan come to mind).
As for the former First Lady, I can't think of much positive to say about her and the abysmal campaign she has run to this point. A lot of people have been been remarking about her endurance and her toughness for staying in the race. She's lost so many contests, they say, and been lambasted by the media from Day 1, but here she is, still in it. Yeah, right. Because, you know, having tons of money and the last name Clinton doesn't have anything to do with why she's still in. Her wins on March 4 are misleading: she will wind up losing Texas in reality when the caucus results show Obama won more delegates, and she won Ohio by 10 points when she was leading there by about 20 or 25 about a month ago. It broke up an incredible string of 12 straight contest victories for Obama during which he amassed a tremendous pledged delegate advantage and wooed the support of 53 superdelegates. But the wins for Clinton will end up only providing a net gain of four or five delegates, which may have already been wiped out by Obama's decisive Wyoming caucus victory today.
What has been so disturbing is the way Hillary, and her surrogates, have been handling themselves in recent weeks as part of the so-called "kitchen sink" strategy. She has taken every opportunity to disparage the victories and the overall candidacy of her rival. Despite Obama's admirable and superior organization in caucus states, the Clinton camp never fails to describe his victories in these states as unimportant and caucuses themselves as undemocratic (although I don't see her rushing to give back those undemocratically-won delegates from Nevada anytime soon). More recently she has taken to calling out Obama on his perceived lack of experience and has clearly aligned herself with John McCain in that department, so much so that she has suggested McCain would be a much better commander in chief than Obama. She's also said that his entire campaign has been based on one anti-war speech he gave in 2002. This blatantly disrespects Obama's work as a community organizer, a civil rights lawyer and professor, a state legislator and a U.S. Senator. And, worst of all, her "3 AM phone call" ad stooped to something I never thought I'd ever see a Democrat do: fear-mongering.
Henry Clay, who was House Speaker three separate times from 1811 to 1825 and also ran for the presidency on five occasions, once famously declared he would "rather be right than be president." In 2008, Hillary Clinton has proved that she'd very much rather be president than be right. There are no boundaries to her presidential ambitions, and she doesn't care if she destroys her party to realize those ambitions. Even when independent analysis shows she must win a virtually-impossible 63% of remaining delegates to overtake Obama's pledged delegate lead while superdelegates continue to flock to the Land of Lincolner's side, there's no signs that Clinton will get out of the race anytime soon. If Obama can overtake her in Pennsylvania in 45 days (where the Clinton camp has said they are "unbeatable"), would THAT be enough to end this? Or would she bitch and complain that the Florida and Michigan delegates should be seated against the rules of the Democratic National Committee? It will be a happy day when McCain and Obama can finally go head-to-head, but instead we have to go through possibly three more months of this meaningless bullshit. And Hillary Clinton simply doesn't care. It was unfortunate that an Obama foreign policy adviser resigned this week after she called Clinton a "monster" during an interview. It's not unfortunate because she said it. It's unfortunate because she resigned after telling the truth.
Obama is in a tough position. He can either turn negative against Clinton and drag up things like the Ghost of Vince Foster, or he can stay on the message that has got him this far. I hope like hell he sticks with hope and change. He is going to be the Democratic nominee, and, in my opinion, a lock to be the 44th U.S. President.
Check back often. In the words of Hillary, I'm just getting warmed up.
I chose to name this blog Blue Musings because, as many of you know, I am a registered Democrat. I've reached a point in my belief system that I don't really ever see myself voting for a Republican under any circumstances in any race. I blame this primarily on watching Bush and his lackey cohorts ruin America since 2000. People wonder why the campaign for the 2008 presidency started so early; I think it's pretty simple. All people, even Republicans, wanted nothing more than to move on from the hellish reign of Brainless the Second. It has been so funny to me during this election year to watch George Bush become such a non-factor to the American populace. It's almost as if Americans view the three people who could be the next president like they already are president. I never thought I'd ever see something like that, but that speaks to how unpopular the President is.
I guess the appearance of "Yes We Can" in my info is a dead giveaway about whom I am supporting this time around. I don't feel like I should have to defend Barack Obama or the reasons why I voted for him in the New Hampshire primary or why I'll vote for him in the general election (I'll get to my own personal Obama Inevitability argument later on). The most important factor that attracted me to Obama in the weeks leading up to the primary here was his inspirational nature of his candidacy. Republicans and supporters of Hillary Clinton like to call Obama soft on the issues (a complete misnomer if there ever was one), but it seems to be those people are missing out on the biggest aspect of Obama's appeal. There's something to be said for political figure that inspires the masses to be better citizens, to engage in the process, and to improve and CHANGE the timbre of this country. Obama is the only candidate that has that going for him, and it's a fairly short list of people historically who have had that (Jackson, Lincoln, TR, FDR, both the Kennedys and Reagan come to mind).
As for the former First Lady, I can't think of much positive to say about her and the abysmal campaign she has run to this point. A lot of people have been been remarking about her endurance and her toughness for staying in the race. She's lost so many contests, they say, and been lambasted by the media from Day 1, but here she is, still in it. Yeah, right. Because, you know, having tons of money and the last name Clinton doesn't have anything to do with why she's still in. Her wins on March 4 are misleading: she will wind up losing Texas in reality when the caucus results show Obama won more delegates, and she won Ohio by 10 points when she was leading there by about 20 or 25 about a month ago. It broke up an incredible string of 12 straight contest victories for Obama during which he amassed a tremendous pledged delegate advantage and wooed the support of 53 superdelegates. But the wins for Clinton will end up only providing a net gain of four or five delegates, which may have already been wiped out by Obama's decisive Wyoming caucus victory today.
What has been so disturbing is the way Hillary, and her surrogates, have been handling themselves in recent weeks as part of the so-called "kitchen sink" strategy. She has taken every opportunity to disparage the victories and the overall candidacy of her rival. Despite Obama's admirable and superior organization in caucus states, the Clinton camp never fails to describe his victories in these states as unimportant and caucuses themselves as undemocratic (although I don't see her rushing to give back those undemocratically-won delegates from Nevada anytime soon). More recently she has taken to calling out Obama on his perceived lack of experience and has clearly aligned herself with John McCain in that department, so much so that she has suggested McCain would be a much better commander in chief than Obama. She's also said that his entire campaign has been based on one anti-war speech he gave in 2002. This blatantly disrespects Obama's work as a community organizer, a civil rights lawyer and professor, a state legislator and a U.S. Senator. And, worst of all, her "3 AM phone call" ad stooped to something I never thought I'd ever see a Democrat do: fear-mongering.
Henry Clay, who was House Speaker three separate times from 1811 to 1825 and also ran for the presidency on five occasions, once famously declared he would "rather be right than be president." In 2008, Hillary Clinton has proved that she'd very much rather be president than be right. There are no boundaries to her presidential ambitions, and she doesn't care if she destroys her party to realize those ambitions. Even when independent analysis shows she must win a virtually-impossible 63% of remaining delegates to overtake Obama's pledged delegate lead while superdelegates continue to flock to the Land of Lincolner's side, there's no signs that Clinton will get out of the race anytime soon. If Obama can overtake her in Pennsylvania in 45 days (where the Clinton camp has said they are "unbeatable"), would THAT be enough to end this? Or would she bitch and complain that the Florida and Michigan delegates should be seated against the rules of the Democratic National Committee? It will be a happy day when McCain and Obama can finally go head-to-head, but instead we have to go through possibly three more months of this meaningless bullshit. And Hillary Clinton simply doesn't care. It was unfortunate that an Obama foreign policy adviser resigned this week after she called Clinton a "monster" during an interview. It's not unfortunate because she said it. It's unfortunate because she resigned after telling the truth.
Obama is in a tough position. He can either turn negative against Clinton and drag up things like the Ghost of Vince Foster, or he can stay on the message that has got him this far. I hope like hell he sticks with hope and change. He is going to be the Democratic nominee, and, in my opinion, a lock to be the 44th U.S. President.
Check back often. In the words of Hillary, I'm just getting warmed up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
