Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Dear Pennsylvania...
I don't like you very much right now, as it seems all you are doing is prolonging an already exhausting election process. At least a win for Obama would have (mostly) solidified the Democratic nomination in his favor. At this point, my bigger issue is that neither candidate can seem to close the deal, and that doesn't leave me very confident that Democrats have their s**t together in the first place. Maybe the Dems need another four years to get their ducks in a row?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
yes, but who wants Obama to be the nominee? Neither candidate can win before the convention and the superdelegates cast their votes.
I do! I can't STAND the thought of another four years of Bill Clinton, even if he's not wearing the pants this time around. (Well, nor was he during his scandal-plagued presidency, but that's neither here nor there...)
Sign me up for a Clinton filled White House!! Maybe Chelsea can run in 20 years!
But aside from not being Hilary, what exactly do you like about Obama? Specific things. His talent in public speaking aside.
go Hillary :) Glad to know my vote helped!
Also, let's not be overly dismissive about McCain... if both Democrats go the distance, as it appears to be the case, they will only have a few months to try to recast national discussion. During that same period McCain can shore up his conservative base and start moving where he can to appeal to moderates/independents. As much as the generic numbers are against a GOP candidate, this prolonged primary fight certainly makes him viable (his strength with independents in swing states like NH also helps). We may be hearing him sing 'Bomb Iran' from the West Wing sometime next February.
Yes, I would not dismiss McCain, especially as the Democrats are doing their level best to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory right now. The longer the Democratic primary process has drawn itself out, each candidate becomes less and less appealing. Hillary is reminding voters of how the Clintons do politics: bend, distort, lie, say and do whatever is necessary to win. Unfortunately, that doesn't work as well in the YouTube age. And people are looking past Obama's audaciously hopeful persona and into his character, his beliefs, and political associations; and they're realizing that he is one of the most rabidly liberal members of Congress, far outside the mainstream in his votes and his friends. He's also demonstrating an acute arrogance in his angry shock that people are actually questioning him on these things. He's no longer the unblemished standardbearer for the Democrats' future.
As for McCain: as a conservative there's much I disagree with him on. However, he's a principled man (though sometimes he clings to principle to the exclusion of common sense). And while there are many issues on the table in this election, for the next four years I'm pretty much a one-issue voter, and that issue is: who will be the best commander-in-chief? And McCain in my mind is the best choice of the three. As one pseudo-slogan floating around for his campaign says: "I don't know much about economics, but I did stay in a Hanoi Hilton once."
Concerning Iran: McCain may or may not sing "Bomb Iran" while in office. I doubt Bush will, as he is too exhausted from seven years of war to do anything but think of his legacy. But something more needs to be done to stop the flow of weapons from Iran into Iraq, as currently we are doing: nothing. I can't begin to tell you how frustrating it is to read intel reports detailing caches of brand-new Iranian-made arms found out here, know that they would have been used against us if we hadn't found them, and know equally well that no one is going to make them stop.
Post a Comment