The Obama Phenomenon and the 2008 Presidential Campaign

[nerdanel]

With 76 percent of precincts reporting, Hillary has declared victory over Obama (at this point 39% Hillary/36% Obama).

[Holbytla]

Seeing all of these speeches tonight I am struck by seeing the families on the various stages. In particular I am struck by seeing Bill CLinton.
I'm not sure how I feel about that. I do think he needs to be there like all the other spouses, but I can't help but feel he needs to distance himself from her, even though she owes him part of her support.

I do believe she is her own person and is mostly responsible for her own success, but I just wonder how large a part Bill plays both positively and negatively.

I think it will be cool to see what kind of "first mister" he plays if she does get elected. Especially during her first term.
Whatever he does he needs to stay out of trouble.

Most first ladies have legacies and it will be interesting to see Bill's legacy as the first first mister.

[River]

Maybe she'll fit him with a chastity belt.

[Túrin Turambar]

Most first ladies have legacies and it will be interesting to see Bill's legacy as the first first mister.

I'm still hoping that South Carolina and Super Tuesday will make that question moot.

[Primula Baggins]

I just know that watching Obama's speech, my son and husband and I sat in a row with tears in our eyes.

Oh, no doubt it's all illusory and all that, and there is no reason to be anything other than savagely cynical; but how powerful it was to believe for a moment that there was hope of something better than what we've had for seven years, and that the worries that sometimes keep me awake at night might actually matter to someone who can do something about them.

*sigh*

[River]

Most first ladies have legacies and it will be interesting to see Bill's legacy as the first first mister.

I'm still hoping that South Carolina and Super Tuesday will make that question moot.

Yes.

I'm starting to rethink my own plans for Super Tuesday. She must be stopped!

[Holbytla]

Oh come on. Where is the sense of humor?
None of them are going to change nary a thing so we may as well yuck it up for a few years.
Can't wait to see Bill in his formal gown.

And honestly I think she would be an improvement over W anyway.
And I'm not sold on Obama yet.

Besides she has good hair.

[Túrin Turambar]

Besides she has good hair.

If we're going to use that as our standard, Edwards and Romney may as well start writing their acceptance speeches...

[Holbytla]

Yeah but in Romney's case the snake oil has messed up his do.
No idea why Edwards isn't more popular.

[axordil]

To me, those Republicans (the subset who feel that way) - that's simply an astounding position. I'd prefer not even to believe that people vote that way. However, I still think that the solution is not to have issue-based voters drop out of the election.

No presidential election in your lifetime, or mine, has been won on issues. The classic Democratic mistake is to think that someone who believes all the right things according to the stated (or at least polled) desires of the electorate must logically beat someone who doesn't, even if the right-thinking person is Dukakis, or Kerry, or Mondale, or any of the other losers we've sent to the slaughter over the past generation.

It's like after JFK the Democrats forgot about the fact that Image Sells. Not Issues. Image. But the GOP know it. Bill Clinton knew it, and had a salable brand, unlike his more wonkish wife.

You may not like it. I'm not happy about it myself. But it's the way things are, for now, and it's not going to change this year.

My deepest fear is that after cranking up young voter turnout throughout hard-fought primary races, Obama will end up losing to HRC late, and the Democrats will lose a GENERATION of voters who learn nothing from the experience save that the Powers that Be have rigged it so they really CAN'T be beat.

[Erunáme]

No idea why Edwards isn't more popular.

For me it's his legal career. A lot of the big cases he was involved in did merit action, but a lot of the money awarded was exorbitant. Him being part of that system is a turn off for me.

[solicitr]

No idea why Edwards isn't more popular.

Three possible ideas:

1) He's a trial lawyer. For a lot of voters that's like 'Satan-worshipper." Or 'child molestor."

2) For the same reason lots of populist/progressive politicians weren't more popular, from Bryan to LaFollette to Wallace and onward: the class-warfare rhetoric gets a segment of the electorate juiced; but there's another, probably larger, segment whom it turns off, and I don't mean the wealthy. There's a peculiarity of the American electorate which foregn observers usually miss, and domestic ones sometimes do; namely, that very many, probably most Americans, still think of themselves as at least potentially joining the ranks of the 'rich' at some time in their lives. No matter how unrealistic that may be, they get decidedly uncomfortable with politicians who tell them how evil the club they hope to join is, and how they plan to destroy it.

5) He's too pretty to be a convincing 'one of y'all' figure.


On a separate note: I don't like GWB and agree he's a dolt, but if you don't live in NO/south MS, how has he made your life worse? My principal beefs with Bush are his utter failure to control runaway spending, and his inability to get passed anything about the looming Social Security nightmare.

[Holbytla]

On a separate note: I don't like GWB and agree he's a dolt, but if you don't live in NO/south MS, how has he made your life worse?

Oh boy.

I don't think he is guiltless for gas being $3.00+ a gallon and the oil companies raking in record profits.

Strangely enough, it is those same oil companies that produce the material for the bodybags required by this supremely foolish endeavor he has got us into.

Any person his age and living in this world has been shown without question that situations like us with Vietnam and the USSR with Afghanistan are a recipe for failure. Defeating an army or country is one thing. Occupying a country and exerting outside influence in a region that detests us is purely stupid.

Especially one with phantom WOMD.

We can wipe out a military, seek vengeance for atrocities tossed in our direction, try and root out some of the evil that remains, but after that it is time to get the hell out.

Someone asked me at the start of the Iraq war how long I thought it would last. I said, well it will take a month or two to overcome the country, but if you are asking me when the last bullet will be fired, never. Not as long as we are there. We have no business in that country and this was more to finish the job daddy didn't than anything else.

Drive around from state to state and see all the tragic memorials for all the dead soldiers that should never have been. Ask them what they have against W.

[WampusCat]

I just know that watching Obama's speech, my son and husband and I sat in a row with tears in our eyes.

Oh, no doubt it's all illusory and all that, and there is no reason to be anything other than savagely cynical; but how powerful it was to believe for a moment that there was hope of something better than what we've had for seven years, and that the worries that sometimes keep me awake at night might actually matter to someone who can do something about them.

*sigh*

I was terribly disappointed for the same reasons. I really thought there might be a movement toward hope. I wanted to believe.

And I think that if Hillary becomes the nominee, the Democrats will once again have thrown away the presidency by putting up the wrong candidate.

[Primula Baggins]

I don't think winning New Hampshire makes her inevitable. It's early days yet.

Santa brought me FROM THE EARTH TO THE MOON, the HBO miniseries about the Apollo program, and I've been watching it. The opening credits include a clip of a Kennedy speech:

We choose to go to the moon in this decade—and to do the other things—not because they are easy but because they are hard. . . .

That's what I miss: the idea that we're a capable nation, not a mass of meek, cowed work-drones; that we can rise to challenges; that maybe we don't have to hand our futures and our children's futures over to the corporations and their government toadies in both parties.

I know, ha ha.

[Holbytla]

I'm not convinced there is a republican that can beat either Hillary or Obama. I really think the country is angry, and that the republicans are getting the brunt of that anger.

[WampusCat]

I'm not so sure that a Republican defeat is assured. There is so much entrenched hatred of the Clintons. Perhaps my view is jaundiced because so much of the hateful rhetoric and rumors cross my desk. There's some truly vile stuff making the rounds.

Yes, I also see some racist rants about Obama, and lots of insinuation that he's Muslim. But even those don't come close to the garbage put out about Hillary.

[Primula Baggins]

I've read some analysis that the media bashing of Hillary for her "emotional outburst" the other day may have contributed to her New Hampshire victory: of those who made up their minds on election day, half went for her. It's possible that bashing of either candidate could backfire.

My main hope is that the Democratic front-runners will campaign against the Republicans, not against each other. That would be a change and might mean we end up nominating someone who is still viable.

I also see a lot of interest in the election among my sons' 18- to 20-year-old friends. These kids are not likely to vote Republican, and for the first time I think they are likely to vote.

[vison]

solictr's second point is spot-on. Absolutely.

Aside from any other consideration, the "emotional outburst" from Sen. Clinton makes me ask this: are people really so stupid, and I am not kidding, are people REALLY so stupid that they think if Sen. Clinton became president that she would fall apart into an emotional mess if presented with, say, a threat to the US? Do people REALLY think that having an emotion (if it WAS an emotion) shows the kind of weakness that would have her say, "Oh, gosh, Osama, you frighten me so much that I am just going to roll over and give you, say, Iowa, for your very own?"

I just can't believe anyone is that dumb. It's beyond me. What possible "threat" or "problem" would a tearful president be? REALLY?

Frankly, I think it would be a VAST improvement over some moron all pumped up on testosterone and his finger on the trigger. I would have thought you guys had had enough of that crap to last for 300 years. I remember quite well how "manly" JFK was in the Cuban Missile Crisis. Thank god Khrushchev was man enough to do what he did.

[Padme]

On a separate note: I don't like GWB and agree he's a dolt, but if you don't live in NO/south MS, how has he made your life worse? My principal beefs with Bush are his utter failure to control runaway spending, and his inability to get passed anything about the looming Social Security nightmare.

1. Patriot Act
2. Cutting infrastructure funds to the point even big cities can't afford to fix roads and bridges all in the name of the Iraq war.
3. Abusing the US constitution
4. His economic policies which are horrid.


And on to the real issue of this thread.


I was shocked by the Clinton win. I think the tears helped win some votes. She showed a softer side that had emotions. Anyway I am also afraid it might drive off some of the under 35 voters at some point. I don't know though, according the generations book they are supposed to be very politically active but conservative so who knows.

My kids are going to vote this election...and both have said they are voting for Obama. I think he is the best speaker of the bunch by far and he is good looking enough to hit that prespective too.

As for best hair, maybe that's why Rudy has dropped out of sight