U.S. Presidential Election 2008

[Sean]

So I had to post this. Apparently, since McCain wrapped up the Republican nomination, Republican voters have begun voting for Hillary in primaries where they can because, in part, they view her as easier to beat in the general election than Obama. Here's an excerpt:

Spurred by conservative talk radio, GOP voters who say they would never back Clinton in a general election are voting for her now for strategic reasons: Some want to prolong her bitter nomination battle with Barack Obama, others believe she would be easier to beat than Obama in the fall, or they simply want to register objections to Obama.

"It's as simple as, I don't think McCain can beat Obama if Obama is the Democratic choice," said Kyle Britt, 49, a Republican-leaning independent from Huntsville, Texas, who voted for Clinton in the March 4 primary. "I do believe Hillary can mobilize enough [anti-Clinton] people to keep her out of office."

Britt, who works in financial services, said he is certain he will vote for McCain in November.

and

Some political blogs have suggested that the influx of Clinton-voting Republicans prevented Obama from winning delegates he otherwise would have, by inflating Clinton's totals both statewide and in certain congressional districts. A writer for the liberal blog Daily Kos estimated that Obama could have netted an additional five delegates from Mississippi.

It is also possible, though perhaps unlikely, that enough strategically minded Republicans voted for Clinton in Texas to give her a crucial primary victory there: Clinton received roughly 119,000 GOP votes in Texas, according to exit polls, and she beat Obama by about 101,000 votes.

[Strangelet]

I've been waiting to post on this because I wanted to make sure this was real but it seems to be true.

A full 15 percent of mississippi voters who voted for clinton would be dissatisfied if she were to become president. 4% for obama. The writeup on KOS is pretty good, if you want to delve deeper.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/12/02257/1544


By Rush Limbaugh's own admission, he's been actively persuading people to vote for Hillary, although in his case its more about prolonging the internal fighting to soften up the democrats, whoever wins, than it is about facing hillary over obama.

[Troy McClure]

On a side note: No New Primary for Florida Democrats

[BeautifulBurnout]

Obama's landmark speech at Philadelphia today. (It's 37 mins long but worth the investment)

This man inspires hope. I just hope all you yanks have got the gumption to vote him in

[Strangelet]

Originally Posted by BeautifulBurnout

Obama's landmark speech at Philadelphia today. (It's 37 mins long but worth the investment)

This man inspires hope. I just hope all you yanks have got the gumption to vote him in

I was very impressed by this speech. There was really nothing he could have said differently. Of course its not going to be enough condemnation for half the people and too much for the other half, but in terms of finding yoruself in a no win situation, it was a pretty incredible performance.

I really hate to think of the man losing because of this issue. I can handle corruption, should that be deserving, or weak demonstration of political knowhow. But losing because of this is pretty hard to swallow.

EDIT: what follows is a strangelet rant, read at your own risk.

What continually surprises me is how many times the more patriotic of my fellow citizens need to be reminded that a higher level of patriotism exists above "America: like it or lump it" That to criticize one's country is the true work of a patriot, and the refusal to do so a subtle kind of treason. Several groups have been blamed for 9/11. Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell made the bald face assertions on 9/12/2001 that the ACLU, fags, pagans, feminists, and abortionists are directly responsible for the act of God's retribution. Rev Jeremiah Wright's assertion is that white men are responsible. Neither of them have a legitimate place in the nation's dialog, but its interesting to me how pointing the finger at fags, pagans, and feminists does not imply a hatred towards america but pointing the finger at white men does. Why is this when all three men of God see the country the exact same way: wicked and deserving of God's Judgement?

Obama was right to distance himself from the Pastor's remarks and call them indefensible. None of them have any place in a campaign whose popularity was based on a hopeful look to the future, as opposed to a divisive retreading of villains and scapegoats. Most importantly all of these arguments, Wright's, Falwell's, Robertson's, need to be seen for what they are. Stupid? Yes, although there's more traction blaming rich white men over pagans. Unamerican? absolutely not.

[Sean]

Today's speech set Obama above the fray in my opinion. It was by far the most frank and constructive talk I've ever heard on the subject of race from a politician in my life, and we would be lucky to have someone who can approach such a sensitive situation in such a direct, constructive way as our next President. Without getting too wordy, Hillary Clinton could never do what Obama did today, and neither could McCain. I will be extremely disappointed if Americans are stupid enough to cut him out of the contest after a first class performance like this.

[Deckard]

I have such admiration for him, a man who could be US president. I don't know, it's just bizarre. And i think a lot of us overseas are thinking that way.

(Elton John, can kindly f*ck off )

It's far more than the prospect of a non-white president.
It's far more than being seduced by the oratory of a clever speaker.
It's even more than just agreeing with his political solutions.

For me, it's the way he unapologetically and bravely appeals to the intelligence and virtue of the electorate, something he amply demonstrated in that speech.

I mean, along with the denunciations of Wright, how many other candidates would dare to include the words, "He has been like family to me"?

It would be a real kick in the guts if this honesty, this balanced position, this frankness, ultimately proved to be his downfall. There has to be more to the future of politics than 3am commercials, shame-on-you tactics, slurs of traitor and other attack dog politics.

Mind you, I bet his granny aint thankin' him after that speech.

[Deckard]

Originally Posted by Strangelet

What continually surprises me is how many times the more patriotic of my fellow citizens need to be reminded that a higher level of patriotism exists above "America: like it or lump it" That to criticize one's country is the true work of a patriot, and the refusal to do so a subtle kind of treason. Several groups have been blamed for 9/11. Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell made the bald face assertions on 9/12/2001 that the ACLU, fags, pagans, feminists, and abortionists are directly responsible for the act of God's retribution. Rev Jeremiah Wright's assertion is that white men are responsible. Neither of them have a legitimate place in the nation's dialog, but its interesting to me how pointing the finger at fags, pagans, and feminists does not imply a hatred towards america but pointing the finger at white men does. Why is this when all three men of God see the country the exact same way: wicked and deserving of God's Judgement?

Obama was right to distance himself from the Pastor's remarks and call them indefensible. None of them have any place in a campaign whose popularity was based on a hopeful look to the future, as opposed to a divisive retreading of villains and scapegoats. Most importantly all of these arguments, Wright's, Falwell's, Robertson's, need to be seen for what they are. Stupid? Yes, although there's more traction blaming rich white men over pagans. Unamerican? absolutely not.

That's a good point. I'd not considered this.

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by Strangelet

Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell made the bald face assertions on 9/12/2001 that the ACLU, fags, pagans, feminists, and abortionists are directly responsible for the act of God's retribution. Rev Jeremiah Wright's assertion is that white men are responsible. Neither of them have a legitimate place in the nation's dialog, but its interesting to me how pointing the finger at fags, pagans, and feminists does not imply a hatred towards america but pointing the finger at white men does. Why is this when all three men of God see the country the exact same way: wicked and deserving of God's Judgement?

i'm not sure i agree with your point. the general communal sentiment towards robertson's and falwell's words was pretty angry and unaccepting of the blame. i don't see the outcry over this situation as being inherently louder or more divisive than what came out of the white preachers' portrayals of 9/11 and katrina as a delivery system of god's wrath.

[mmm skyscraper]

From the speech:

But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.

Interesting.