3 columns in today’s newspaper have crystallized a thought that has been forming in my mind for some time: If Hillary Clinton is the Democratic candidate for President, John McCain (“who almost promises a war with Iran”) and the Republicans may win the presidency again in 2008. 10 Key facts to consider:
1. Romney has quit the race, making McCain the de facto Republican candidate.
2. Contributors are voting with their wallets for Obama:
a. Obama’s campaign raised $32 million in January, $3 million on Wednesday (the day after the Super Tuesday) and $7 million total since Super Tuesday.
b. Clinton’s campaign only raised $4 million since Super Tuesday.
c. Clinton has loaned her campaign $5 million.
d. Clinton staffers are voluntarily forgoing paychecks.
3. Clinton is seen as “the most polarizing person in contemporary politics.” (George F. Will – see below, Stanley Fish, NY Times)
4. Obama has greater appeal than Clinton to independent voters.
5. California voters could play a critical role again in November.
6. Obama only lost in California by almost 390,000 votes, he surely ran much closer in the votes cast on Tuesday, after Clinton’s double-digit lead in polls had evaporated.
7. How many votes already cast in California for John Edwards would have gone to Obama?
8. Party identification is weak in California. Democrats are losing ground with registered voters.
9. The rapidly growing ranks of independent voters hold the balance of political power in California.
10. A poll of likely California voters found that McCain was virtually tied with Clinton in a hypothetical match up while Obama held a seven-point lead over McCain.
Key points from all three columns:
1) “Division Problems” By E. J. Dionne Jr.
John McCain is now the clear Republican front-runner, but … has survived only because conservative opponents have fractured their movement.
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama fought to a near draw (and the) primaries revealed a sharp gender gap; a generation gap at least as deep as the age divide that was so widely advertised in the 1960s; and differences across ethnicity, race and class.
... Obama is the overwhelming favorite of voters under 30, and has inspired a disciplined army of youthful organizers who helped him win decisive victories in caucuses in Colorado, Kansas, Idaho, Minnesota, North Dakota and Alaska. If Clinton is the nominee, how many of these young voters will walk away from a process that thwarted their hopes?
Does Clinton’s weakness among male Democrats -- she lost men by 20 points in Delaware, 21 points in Connecticut and 39 points in Georgia -- portend problems in a general election?
----------------------------------------------------------
2) "Democrats Living Dangerously: Early Voting Insanity And a GOP Gift"
By George F. Will, Washington Post
Thursday, February 7, 2008; Page A21
Forewarned, Democrats now are forearmed -- not that they will necessarily make sensible use of the gift. Tuesday's voting armed Democratic voters with the name of the candidate that their nominee will face in the fall. Will their purblind party now nominate the most polarizing person in contemporary politics (Clinton), knowing that Republicans will nominate the person who tries to compensate for his weakness among conservatives with his strength among independent voters who are crucial to winning the White House? Perhaps.
The Republican Party's not-so-secret weapon always is the Democratic Party, with its entertaining thirst for living dangerously.
...
The surest way to unify the Republican Party, however, is for Democrats to nominate Hillary Clinton. Barack Obama, the foundation of whose candidacy is his early opposition to the war in Iraq, would be a more interesting contrast to the candidate who is trying to become the oldest person ever elected to a first presidential term and who almost promises a war with Iran ("There is only one thing worse than military action, and that is a nuclear-armed Iran").
--------------------------------------------------
3) "California may have a voice in November"
By Dan Walters, Sacramento Bee
Wednesday,February 6, 2008
California's decades-long isolation from national politics ended Tuesday as voters turned out heavily to vote in two close contests for presidential nominations – and they could play a critical role again in November.
The political media have made much of the state's non-involvement in choosing presidential candidates for the last several decades, thanks to its traditionally late primary elections, but California also has been taken for granted in the November duels.
...
Party identification is weak in California, and both parties have been losing ground in voter registration – especially the Democrats – and the rapidly growing ranks of independent voters hold the balance of political power. Independents – liberal on social issues, generally, but conservative on taxes and crime – have favored the most centrist, or the least ideologically rigid, candidates.
Independents have leaned Democratic in most recent high-profile elections but the election and re-election of Arnold Schwarzenegger indicate that they're willing to vote for a moderate GOP candidate. And McCain fits that description, a Republican who, like Schwarzenegger, is often castigated by the GOP right for deviating from ideological dogma – on immigration most notably. A poll of likely California voters by Field Research found that McCain was virtually tied with Clinton in a hypothetical matchup while Obama, thanks largely to his broader appeal, held a seven-point lead over McCain.
--------------------------------------------------
Vote for Obama in 2008 - Our best hope for the future
Please forward this link to people you know in these key states: Texas, Ohio, Louisiana, Maine, Nebraska, Washington, Maryland, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Hawaii
No comments:
Post a Comment