Obama will be giving his acceptance speech for the Democratic nomination. I intend to be blogging live and commenting as it goes.
At this point, to be honest, I’m not loving Obama’s chances come November, for three reasons:
1) He’s black. A lot of people in this country don’t like blacks.
2) He’s intelligent. A lot of people in this country don’t like intelligence.
3) He’s not Hillary Clinton. A lot of people in this country are pìššëd øff about that.
That is, of course, as of this writing. A lot can happen on both sides. Gaffes. Missteps. Lies that take hold and become truth through repetition. Anything.
But as of this writing, to me…looks like President McCain. I hope I’m wrong.
PAD
• 
But as of this writing, to me…looks like President McCain. I hope I’m wrong.
PAD
And besides that, I figure the Repubs have their plans all set to rig this one, too.
There’s also the fact that his demographic (young, well-educated, anti-war) is pretty much the same that McGovern’s was… and he lost 49 out of 50 states even without electronic vote rigging.
People I talk to think Hillary did really well last night, but I thought she was 20 seconds away from talking about dodging sniper-fire in Kosovo. “When the bullets are flying over the tarmac, keep going.“
A year ago I didn’t think Obama had a chance. A few months ago I got a lot more confident in his chances. Now I’m on the fence. I think it’s gonna be tough, but I give him a slight edge right now.
There are some things going on that could make the youth vote more useful than it has been in the past. In the past when a candidate had a huge following with 18-30 year olds, those people seemed enthusiastic, but they just didn’t show up at the polls. No logical reason why, voting just isn’t as important to them, so they literally forgot to vote on election day.
Now there have been studies showing that those people are significantly more likely to vote if they get a text message reminding them to the day before. It sounds stupid to me, but apparently they really do just forget if not prodded. Guess what, Obama’s campaign has a plan to do mass text message reminders the day before the election.
Ohio, a hugely important state, has enacted a law that allows people to register and vote all at once for a week before the election. Ohio also has almost half a million college students, all of whom will be eligible to vote in Ohio because they only have to be residents for a month. I’m betting that in the week before the election, Obama will spend a day, maybe two, hitting at least four colleges a day and giving speeches that end with, “There’s a voter registration station 200ft feet in that direction where you can vote *today*. I encourage all of you to do that right now.” They’ll be fired up because of the speech and they’ll do it. This tactic was done extensively during the primaries and it’s a big part of how they got record turn-outs.
As for the current polls, they’re of limited use. Most polls don’t call cell phones and currently 14% of Americas don’t have a land line, they’re cell phone only. Who’s in that 14%? Mostly young people, Obama’s demographic. So polls are a little useful for looking at trends, but nobody really knows what the numbers are right now.
I think you overestimate the importance of reasons 1 and 3. Reason 1 is true, but the fact that Obama is black also has a lot of young, black people intending to vote who wouldn’t be if it were Cracker #1 vs. Cracker# 2. So the race thing is kind of a wash.
And as for Reason 3, the number of people who are actually pìššëd enough about Hillary losing to either not vote or vote for McCain is actually rather small. The media plays them up like they’re a big factor because it makes for a good story, but most Hillary supporters had already begrudgingly followed her to Obama’s camp, and last night’s speech should have taken care of all but the most fanatically devoted. The only people left complaining now are the political equivalent of the people who hate the new BSG because Starbuck’s a woman: loud in voice, but small in number and pathetic in influence.
I have no doupt in my mind that a woman or a black man can be president.
Sad thing is I don’t think the American population is ready for it
More of them are ready for it now than used to be the case, though. That clock will keep on ticking.
Having followed US politics for over 10 years now, I still cant really understand how a bozo like McCain can be an option. He is a babble away from beign a firm candidate to a mental institution… is really the whole War hero crap so important over there?
And with all the wars you have had… isnt there any other war heroes to choose?
As a citizen of the Western Empire without the right to vote for whoever will hold a great deal of influence over my world… I beg you to please vote carefully, because after Bush I dont know if we can endure another Nero.
And besides that, I figure the Repubs have their plans all set to rig this one, too.
Yeah, they did a real snap up job in the 2006 elections. The Democrats never knew what hit them.
I think it’ll come down to a few states, just like the last 2 elections and I pity the folks in those states. Watching TV will be hëll.
Despite some recent missteps that puzzle me I still think it’s Obama’s to lose. He just has to hold his own in the debates (I expect Biden will do well against anyone McCain is likely to pick) and keep his loonier followers in line. A little bit of self depreciating humor would help negate some of the attacks.
And besides that, I figure the Repubs have their plans all set to rig this one, too.
Yeah, they did a real snap up job in the 2006 elections. The Democrats never knew what hit them.
Ah, but the 2006 elections were “one person one vote,” not Electoral College-determined elections. All you have to do is focus your efforts on a few states, not the whole country. It’s why presidential candidates pay little attention to states like mine, Indiana (almost always Republican and only 9 electoral votes), and more to Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, etc.
President McCain.
Don’t say that. Don’t print that. Because somewhere, a whole bunch of idiots (like my mother) are going to see it and think it’s already been decided, and vote that way.
The worst was all the super-fems crying and tantrumming because Hillary wasn’t the one up there, that they’d been robbed, and the whole process was corrupt (where have they been for the last 200 years???), so they were going to vote for McCain. Say what??? All I could think of was the Ellen Jamesians from World According to Garp: in psycho sympathy for poor unelected Hillary, they’d run off and have their tongues cut out to protest their loss of voice. I really wanted to see Hillary up there, but since she’s not, I will whole-heartedly support Obama. I can only hope enough people are hurting hard enough in our floundering economy that they’ll be willing enough to look beyond color and vote for an end to this nightmare.
I so hope it’s Obama. But if it’s not I’m trying to put myself in the frame of mind that McCain would at least be a better President than Bush. That’s the one good thing about Bush: He’s been such a godawful President, that anyone would look like an improvement. I think I just have to convince myself that this is the best mindset to adopt in order to keep myself from pulling all my hair out in the event of another four-to-eight years of neocon psychosis dragging the country further down the tubes (with apologies to George Carlin).
As I’m neither a Democrat (I’m so far to the left that I can barely see the earth from here) nor a Republican, I wouldn’t be too worried about Obama’s chances. McCain is an extremely weak opponent.
He’s this worn out grognard in poor health that doesn’t know how to check his own email. He’s not out of touch, he’s out of hearing and sight as well. He’s over the hill in the next county from being in touch.
He’s also about as charismatic as a lump of coal. Sure, Obama is smart and that intimidates many Americans, but, man . . . McCain makes Gore seem vital and exciting. The man’s from Arizona – remember, even their wood is petrified. McCain is anti-charisma, not even wooden but stony.
McCain’s also got a long track record. This is a HUGE NEGATIVE. Senators, because of the job they do, have a lot of compromises in their history. The longer they’ve done their job, the more compromises they have.
McCain does not inflame the Republican base. Since Reagan, Republicans get elected because conservative fundamentalists Christians get the vote out. These guys don’t like McCain. The Republican base will be disspirited and passionless.
The successful Obama campaign will work off of these massive problems. Attacks should be launched on McCain on the basis of him being wickedly out of touch with current issues and values. You attack his record again and again to undermine his support amongst his base – point out that this guy doesn’t give a dámņ about abortion or gay marriage and is playing them for suckers. Bring up ever flip-flop that McCain has done and brand him indecisive, lacking in courage and vision. Show as many images of McCain as possible being stone faced with that hideous grimace he has – just hammer it home that this guy’s a ghoul in an ugly suit pretending to smile while he hates you and everything you love.
I think a chimpanzee could win against someone as multifacetedly weak as McCain. If Obama looses this one, I honestly think it’ll be because Democrats can’t run a Presidential campaign to save their lives. With the exception of the Clintons, and the first thing that Obama should have done is get Bill and Hillary working *his* campaign. But I look back at all the utterly dismal campaigns run by Democrats – I mean, Carter, Dukakis, Mondale, Gore and Kerry in my memory – and I feel each and every one of them lost not because they were weaker candidates (they were often much STRONGER candidates) but because of innumerable dropped balls in the campaign. I think if Obama can avoid dropping some of those balls, this should be a total cake walk.
But I look back at all the utterly dismal campaigns run by Democrats – I mean, Carter, Dukakis, Mondale, Gore and Kerry in my memory – and I feel each and every one of them lost not because they were weaker candidates (they were often much STRONGER candidates) but because of innumerable dropped balls in the campaign.
See, I don’t get that. If you drop innumerable balls in a campaign you can hardly be described as a “strong” candidate. I mean, isn’t that your job as a candidate–to run a strong campaign?
I agree with Peter David. Too many of Clinton’s supporters will stay home, and too many racists will vote against Obama.
Watch the polls for “Undecided” voters. Most of them always vote for the Republican candidate. If the poll is within 5 or 6 points for Obama, figure McCain is actually in the lead.
Luigi Novi,
Not to nitpick, but Carlin’s phrase was actually “DTD: Down The Drain”.
And however you phrase them, I reject your analysis and conclusions in your post fully. I will explain why shortly.
Bill,
You raise an interesting point. 😉
I think I meant to say that based on qualifications the Democratic candidates were equally qualified for the job, or more qualified, but lost as a result of poor campaigns. Y’know, the qualifications that aren’t “an ability to run a campaign” which are nevertheless vital for doing the job rather than merely being elected to do the job (which are two different sets of skills, after all; many a dismal politician has been elected).
I’m afraid I’m with PAD on this one. It seems to me that the only thing McCain can come up with to use against Obama is “Gee, he sure seems to be really popular with a lot of people. That’s kind of scary, don’t you think?” and, much to my amazement, it seems to be working.
That tells me that many, many folks are looking for a reason not to vote for Obama. Any reason at all, really.
Oh, and someone made this point in a column today regarding the “biggest issue being Obama’s skin”.
As things stand now, 95% of blacks are prepared to vote for Obama, the black guy.MANY ONLY BECAUSE HE IS BLACK.
Meanwhile, only 45% of whites are prepared to vote for the white guy, McCain.
So, would it be fair to say that in a close election black racism/tribalism will possibly put Obama over the top?
I think the subtitle of Michael Moore’s new book is something like “How the Democrats can lose the most winnable election in history.”
However, I don’t think they *are* going to lose it. First, unfortunate as it may be, Obama learned from 2004 and isn’t going to take the high road of discussing issues while his opponent takes the low (but effective) road of personal attacks. I recall the 2004 DNC barely mentioned the Republicand, while the RNC had Zell Miller practically calling for the outlawing of all Democrats.
Second, people hate Bush — and the Democrats are doing an excellent job of linking the two (using, ironically enough, the Republican tactic of repetition as much as possible to make a mental association); plus George W. will be one of the speakers at the RNC. I wonder if he’ll talk about his low approval rating, or how history will vindicate him?
Third, people really do want change — and a young black senator with new ideas trumps the oldest white guy who seems to support the last white guy.
Fourth, I don’t think most young and/or Hillary supporters will stay at home. A lot of the “division” between Hilary and Obama is conservative hype (bet McCain doesn’t run any ads with any of her speech last night), and I think a lot of young voters realize that this is really a split between something new (or at least newer) and the next 4 years of Bush.
Yes, we still have months ahead before the votes are counted, and just about anything can happen in that time — but I definitely wouldn’t count Obama out. Not by a long shot.
Obama is going to be President. McCain doesn’t get crowds like Obama. McCain cant get money like Obama. McCain doesn’t have the ability to draw crowds in a foreign country like Obama. The guy inspires people, gives them Hope for whatever reason, and Hope does silly things. And honestly, I think the voter turnout during the primaries is easily forgotten. I think we will all be surprised this November. Just like when Obama took Iowa.
I think I meant to say that based on qualifications the Democratic candidates were equally qualified for the job, or more qualified, but lost as a result of poor campaigns. Y’know, the qualifications that aren’t “an ability to run a campaign” which are nevertheless vital for doing the job rather than merely being elected to do the job (which are two different sets of skills, after all; many a dismal politician has been elected).
True, true. My basic feeling is that, imperfect as it is, the ability to run a campaign is as good an indication of of an ability to govern as we are likely to get.
It’s certainly possible that one could be a terrible campaigner, making one stupid choice after another…and then, once in office, stop being a dope. But that’s not the way to bet.
One the race issue–Obama has been very smart about not insinuating that any opposition to him must be race based. For good reason. If the idea that the only reason he could lose is because of racism becomes a major talking point it will hurt him big time. People will not be bullied into voting for someone and will resent the implication that they have to vote a certain way to demonstrate their lack of racism. In the privacy of the voting booth that resentment would cost Obama dearly.
So he has to be careful to put a lid on that. he didn’t do such a great job of this with the Hillary folks, which is why some of them are so bitter. But they will almost all come around, they aren’t a big problem. If the same thing happens with independents…big problem.
Obama has stirred up great passion and has some devoted followers. Now, can he keep them from screwing it all up?
But as of this writing, to me…looks like President McCain. I hope I’m wrong.
With this sort of pessimism, you won’t be.
How about instead of listing (and thereby reinforcing to everyone who reads your blog) what you see as Barack’s liabilities, you write a post why you want Barack to be president? (Or at least, why you don’t want McCain to be president–assuming that’s the case. If not, then it makes sense to air your doubts about Obama.)
I’m not trying to be provocative, I’m just getting tired of reading all these bloggers who are ostensibly progressive but rather than support those who share their beliefs, they just fret and argue over who’s the most electable.
Jerome Maida: Oh, and someone made this point in a column today regarding the “biggest issue being Obama’s skin”.
As things stand now, 95% of blacks are prepared to vote for Obama, the black guy.MANY ONLY BECAUSE HE IS BLACK.
Meanwhile, only 45% of whites are prepared to vote for the white guy, McCain.
So, would it be fair to say that in a close election black racism/tribalism will possibly put Obama over the top?
I think we have to look at those numbers with a lot of context to really see what they mean.
Every President we’ve ever had has been white. So when a white person says they’re voting for the white guy and race is a factor, that means he would never vote for a Black person. That’s clearly racism.
Most of those Black people planning on voting for Obama have voted at least once in their lives. They’ve voted for a white guy, and they’ve all lived under white Presidents for the entirity of their lives. They’ve never had a President who shared what they’ve been through, which is something no white person can say to the same degree. So when they say that they’ll vote for the Black guy and race will be a factor, they’re not saying that they’d never vote for a white guy.
It’s pretty unlikely to the point of impossibility that the mere act of PAD expressing his opinion will have any effect on the result. I don’t see any of the Obama supporters here throwing up their arms in helpless defeat. If a guy shouldn’t use his own freaking blog to post his opinions where is he supposed to go?
And I don’t think there’s anything wrong in supporting someone who, even if they don’t fully share your beliefs, has a chance of winning. It doesn’t really matter if Dennis Kucinich or (snicker) John Edwards match your positions 100%–they ain’t going anywhere. Electability is a very valuable attribute in a politician.
One other thing, Jerome. 95% isn’t as impressive a number as it seems. Kerry got 88% of the Black vote in 2004. The vast majority of Black people are Democrats.
Jerome Maida: Luigi Novi, Not to nitpick, but Carlin’s phrase was actually “DTD: Down The Drain”.
Luigi Novi: He may have used that phrase, but that doesn’t mean that he didn’t also talk about the phrase “down the tubes”. He did this in his 1996 HBO special, Back in Town, which I still have on audio cassette. In the CD track listing, it’s Track #6, called “Familiar Expressions”, in which he expressed his irritation at the use of certain popular figures of speech.
There’s a 2006 article floating around quoting McCain at a labor rally, chiding theaudience for refusing work immigrants will take: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12155322/
You read that right: farmwork is done by immigrants because Americans are turning down $50/hour salaries.
The Atlantic asked for a correspondence- and info-dump from the Hillary staffers after she suspended her campaign, and the got it. The info dump revealed that Hillary was ready to lead on day 120. Mark Penn came up with the “ready on day 1” ad, and Bill approved it. She went to her staffers for solutions while Obama and Edwards staffers were implementing their solutions. She treated the topic of her war vote and stalled on making decisions. Bill was an exellent speaker, but that was his only edge, and Obama doesn’t need help in that department. The Clintons may still have influence, but as a resource, they are a dry well for Obama.
That’s patently wrong. On top of Jason’s point about the huge black turnout for Kerry, as well as Gore, blacks were favoring Hillary over Obama 2:1 before Iowa. If what you’re saying was such a big deal, Obama would have led blacks before Iowa.
I’m curious as to the derivation for the perception of some here that they will vote for Obama, but don’t think that enough of others will. Why is this? Yes, there people who still won’t vote for a black man. We can even say that there are a lot of them, if only because there’s 300 million people in the pool to cull that group from. But just how large is that group? Is this idea based on anything even remotely scientific, or is it just a projection of one’s pessimism, or worse, an unsubstantiated judgmental feeling that the rest of the country isn’t as enlightened as the people saying this? I’m curious.
Peter David: 3) He’s not Hillary Clinton. A lot of people in this country are pìššëd øff about that.
Luigi Novi: But that would mean that the supposedly “liberal” supporters of Hilary would rather see McCain win than Obama. Do you really think there are that many people who can be thus described? Don’t you think they eventually got over Hilary not winning the primaries?
Chris Bradley: McCain’s also got a long track record. This is a HUGE NEGATIVE. Senators, because of the job they do, have a lot of compromises in their history. The longer they’ve done their job, the more compromises they have.
Luigi Novi: Well, that’s one theory, I suppose, but the mudslingers tend to portray this as a positive, in that their guy has “experience”, and the other guy has none. They’ve actually done this by portraying Obama as too green, with not enough tenure.
Jerome Maida: As things stand now, 95% of blacks are prepared to vote for Obama, the black guy.MANY ONLY BECAUSE HE IS BLACK. Meanwhile, only 45% of whites are prepared to vote for the white guy, McCain. So, would it be fair to say that in a close election black racism/tribalism will possibly put Obama over the top?
Luigi Novi: ???????????? Doesn’t this require that the two groups are equal in size to begin with? The U.S. population is a bit over 300 million, of which 80% are white, and about 13% are black. 45% of whites would be 108 million. 95% of blacks would be about 37 million. How precisely does this, in and of itself, put Obama over the top?
Nivek: McCain doesn’t have the ability to draw crowds in a foreign country like Obama.
Luigi Novi: I agree with the other reasons you mentioned, but I don’t know if this one was a pertinent one to include. Crowds in foreign countries don’t determine who wins U.S. elections.
From reading this blog, I’d assume only democrats read comic books. If McCain is going to win (as you say), then where are all of the republicans that are voting for him?
My thoughts on this are as follows: for the past few years, it has become more and more trendy to bash republicans. Shows like the daily show, and MTV icons “supporting” their progressive candidates do a lot to further the view of the hip party with younger demographics.
As a person who supports McCain’s politics, I can’t help but wonder if perhaps you drive people away from your blog by taking up so many posts with pro-Democrat politics? Personally, I was hoping to just get on here to complain about the art in X-Factor and see if anything was being done to fix that situation, but I figured while I was on here I’d drop a differing view point on here as to your latest entry.
Now, by no means am I saying “don’t post this stuff,” or “you are an idiot.” I just find it interesting that every response on here is so unilaterally agreeing with you. So, are fans just not reading this thread that disagree, are they all on one side of the political spectrum, or are some fans driven away by your politics?
Either way, keep up the good writing, and keep the blog entries frequent.
As a person who supports McCain’s politics, I can’t help but wonder if perhaps you drive people away from your blog by taking up so many posts with pro-Democrat politics?
Considering that many of my posts have been critical of Democrats–and considering that this very posting basically states, without a hint of criticism leveled at the GOP (remember, I’m not the one making noises about stolen elections or rigging) that the Democrats are going to blow another election–my guess is that people are driven away because I make ANY pro-Democrat postings.
PAD
Brent, I used to be someone who supported John McCain. On a personal level, I still like him more than Bill Clinton.
But making fun of Republicans is more than just trendy. The Republican leadership deserves it right now. Not the voters, but the Republican politicians and the interest groups that push them. The leadership that *gets* all those Republican voters by lying to them. They’re getting bashed more because they’ve done more to deserve it.
This will change. More and more of the old guard Republicans are being voted out. Part of why I’m leaning towards the Democratic nominee this year is because they Republicans *need* a black eye. The Moral Majority hasn’t ever represented me, so I want a new wave of Republicans to get back to the values that I believe in.
The other reason is that I actually like the policies of Barack Obama better than the recent policies of John McCain. I used to like his policies better, but they’ve moved towards Bush as he’s fought to get elected, and that’s worth bashing, too.
Luigi,
By the way, white aren’t 80% of Americans, they’re 68%. Blacks are a little less than 13% and Hispanics are almost 15%. Asians, mixed, and Native American make up most of the rest.
Jerome Maida at August 27, 2008 10:30 PM wrote:
FYI Jerome, if skin color was the primary attraction to black voters, Ward Connerly and Alan Keyes would be popular with black voters.
I’m really not worried. The Democratic party is slowly coming together. Over the next 2 months there will be plenty of new fuel for the fire coming from the debates.
I do believe the Obama camp has been following the slow-and-steady approach just as they did early in their campaigning. Remember that point in time (awhile before the first primary) where supporters were complaining that Obama wasn’t doing anything? He bided his time instead of exhausting his image. He ended up coming out at a time where the pundits and the audiences were refreshed by his approach and message. Media saturation could have ruined his chances before he even began. He ended up winning that first primary and went on to win the nomination.
All things considered, he’s been quiet since then; his speeches at gatherings have been a regular mantra of change vs the same. I do believe once he gives his speech tomorrow his campaign is going to kick it into overdrive and really start speaking of policy and far more vocal criticisms of McCain’s talking points.
OK.. potentially dumb/naieve question, but I’m foreign so please bear with me…
How much of the presidential election is about voting for/against the person, and how much is about voting for/against the party and/or the policies?
Cheers.
Luigi Novi,
First, regarding Carlin. Ooops. I forgot that bit.
I was wrong.
Second,
“????????????”
This speaks volumes.
“Doesn’t this require that the two groups are in equal in size to begin with?”
No. If that were the case, a multitude of Democrats wouldn’t still be blaming Ralph Nader for swinging the 2000 election with a relatively insignificant vote margin compared to that of Bush and Gore.
I specifically said that in a close election, such votes based solely on Obama’s race or tribalism could put him OVER THE TOP.
No one seems to have a problem with this, as opposed to if exit polls said “among those who couldn’t stand the thought of a black president in the White House and wanted to see “one of their own” represented in the White House, McCain got 95% of the vote. In fact, I could be assured of seeing a plethora of news stories following the election about how “America still has a long way to go” and similar themes.
And yes, if blacks only thought about about the skin color of the CANDIDATES, Keyes and others would fare better. But the unfortunate fact is many black candidates are snubbed if they don’t toe the line on “black issues”. So an underfunded candidate who doesn’t get a fraction of the press love that Obama gets and doesn’t have the “right/correct” position on certain issues is a dead duck. BTW, the fact that Kerry only got 88% of the black vote either shows that he was an extraordinarily weak candidate, since a Dem can normally count on 95%, OR that Bush ran a very good campaign to court them – as he did with Hispanics and other groups Republicans usually have more difficulty courting. Saying “they’ll rig it again” may make some people feel good, but it ignores other more plausible factors. And if Dems do that, they won’t learn and will make the same mistakes with the same results.
And no other demographic is comparable, as far as being monolithic in voting. Women, vets, Hispanics, Jews, etc. There may be reasons for this. But I think it is a given that if Obama does fail to win, many will not even bother to analyze or care why. It will be chalked up to racism. Rather than gaffes, execution, his inexperience or countless other factors. Like that McCain simply made his case better. And that really exasperates me.
The numbers are skewed. The population may be 300 million, but that’s not voters. Remove all those under 18 and unregistered non-voting but able adults (like my inlaws and my best friend’s husband) and those who aren’t allowed a vote for other reasons, and we’re arguably down to 200 million. If you can get a 50% turnout in ANY election, it’s a small miracle, so we’re now down to 100 million people. That’s a much smaller number, and made up more of hard-core voters who all have their own reasons for voting and tend to vote along the same lines each time (hence senators being elected for 50 years regardless of their efficacy). In the end, it will still come down to a tight count between those few people who regularly vote. Our only hope lies with courting those experiencing their first election, who are the real wild cards.
If Obama loses the Democrats will form a circular firing squad. The Clintons will be attacked and they will attack right back, Bill’s head will turn red and swell to 3 times its original height. It will be a sight to see. Yes, racism will be sited as the reason–but this will not serve the party well. People will not respond positively to a party that tries to pass off its own failure onto the supposed mendacity of the public. So I would think you should actually welcome that eventuality; it will be a rare ray of sunshine for your party.
Jerome–while it would be nice if race just wasn’t a factor, it has to be acknowledged that just the reality of Obama becoming the nominee of a party that didn’t even allow black delegates to its convention until the 1930s is something everyone can be happy about. Doesn’t mean you have to vote for him but it’s still a good sign.
I see a lot of reasons why Obama might lose to McCain being thrown around.
I’m a Democrat and McCain will be the first Republican I’ve voted for since the first term of Bush Sr.
Why? Inexperience and a non-American vibe. I think this election, more than ever, we need someone who is a strong American at their core with an America comes first (Period!) attitude.
For me, he seems to want appease the rest of the world at the expense of the United States. I could care less about all the other “reasons” people toss around about why they think people won’t vote for Obama.
I won’t vote for him because I think by the end of his term the US would be a socialist nation.
As someone who will probably vote for McCain, the only way I think McCain will win it is if, a) too many closet racists (ie, people who say-yes for Obama in polls, but don’t vote for him in private) or b) if something earth-shattering happens between now and then.
As far as Clinton voters who want to stick it to DNC, I wouldn’t totally discount it. On Republican side, if McCain was pro-choice or if he picks a pro-choice running mate, I know there are Republicans who would vote for independant or not vote, just to teach RNC a lesson.
As opposed to those who will vote against Obama because he’s black? McCain voted with Bush over 90% of the time, but he’s doing almost 20 points better than the republican brand.
Yeah, it’s funny how much more alarming black racism is than white racism. For one thing, it means the margin of error will always be out of control. Some bášŧárdš always have stop someone from taking absolute control.
Scott, can you give any specifics? What gives you a “non-American vibe”? Don’t take this the wrong way, but so far what you wrote just sounds like all of the attack ads rolled into one without any reasons why you’re thinking that way.
In terms of Obama’s chances, I think the fall is going to be a lot more crucial than it often is. More some other time.
TWL
Peter, I’m not so worried about your three reasons for worrying about Obama’s chances. I think Bill Clinton made an excellent case last night where all three are advantages for Obama.
Obama’s real weakness, I think, has been apparent the past month (and actually, a good while before then in the latter days of the presidential primaries) — an unwillingness to fight. David Kurtz of Talkingpointsmemo makes the point that the Obama campaign doesn’t want to fight, lest it damage the “Obama brand“, which is the post-partisan, change candidate.
And, that’s shades of 2004 — Kerry didn’t fight the Swift Boat attacks, and that did the damage.
Let’s hope that Obama learns from history. Because I don’t want to have to repeat it, because it’s going to be worse this time around.
The advantage Obama has over Kerry is that Kerry had no underlying brand to protect in his tactics. Which only left his vanity he was protecting.
Now, by no means am I saying “don’t post this stuff,” or “you are an idiot.” I just find it interesting that every response on here is so unilaterally agreeing with you. So, are fans just not reading this thread that disagree, are they all on one side of the political spectrum, or are some fans driven away by your politics?
Speaking as one fan who doesnt always agree, and I’m only speaking for myself, I learned early on that if you are going to participate in discussions on this board you have to come up with something better than “your wrong doo doo head” and usually on this board someone will make your point before you get a chance.
sorry forgot to add:
Posted by: Brent E.:
Now, by no means am I saying “don’t post this stuff,” or “you are an idiot.” I just find it interesting that every response on here is so unilaterally agreeing with you. So, are fans just not reading this thread that disagree, are they all on one side of the political spectrum, or are some fans driven away by your politics?
Speaking as one fan who doesnt always agree, and I’m only speaking for myself, I learned early on that if you are going to participate in discussions on this board you have to come up with something better than “your wrong doo doo head” and usually on this board someone will make your point before you get a chance.
Somehow, what’s happening to Obama reminds me of the frequent critical backlash that happens to Hollywood movies. Almost any time a movie receives a tremendous amount of critical praise, a few weeks or months later there’s a response of excessive criticism claiming the earlier hype was either wrong or overpositive. (I think SCHINDLER’S LIST, A BEAUTIFUL MIND and BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN received this treatment.) A few months ago Obama was treated as the true golden boy of politics (which may be why McCain had an ad playing what THE DAILY SHOW called “the Moses card”) — and then the backlash began.
Yes, he’s reversed some positions to get elected (notably offshore drilling and shielding phone companies that performed gov’t wiretapping), and yes he chose a running mate with lots of political experience instead of ending “politics as usual” and yes, the race has become much tighter. But that doesn’t mean he ran out of gas, it certainly doesn’t mean the election is unwinnable, and it doesn’t make him an awful candidate.
“I won’t vote for him because I think by the end of his term the US would be a socialist nation.”
Exactly why I will not vote for Obama either. I do not think Mccain is the strongest candidate by any means, and have severe issues voting for him as well.
But, and in particular, after reading about Obama’s health plan, I’m almost waiting for him to get elected and put a cap on how much money we can earn.
I really want the government OUT of my life, and out of my pocket. I really don’t want them telling me I need to help subsidize health insurance for other people. I don’t expect handouts from anyone, and I absolutely do not want to give my hard earned money to anyone else.
My girlfriend’s friend is a huge Obama supporter and has a Ph.d in Economics. The man is, literally, a socialist. He believes that our economy should be based on Cuba’s (as he has visited Cuba numerous times on educational trips) and supports Obama because of his economic policies.
That alone scares the hëll out of me.
Michael