Ah, the Democrats and their little problems:
…Clinton is still about 100 delegates behind, and the Democrats’ proportional representation rules make it impossible for her to close the gap in the remaining primaries. Her only plausible path to the nomination is to win a majority of super-delegates (party and public officials) and, perhaps, to reverse the party’s decision disqualifying the Michigan and Florida delegations — i.e., overruling the voters in one case and changing the rules after the game has been played in the other.
This might pass muster if the national polls show an unambiguous and substantial move toward Clinton. Otherwise, in more likely and ambiguous circumstances, a Clinton nomination will seem illegitimate to many who have been swooning over Obama and streaming into polling booths because he alone offers hope.
The March 4 exit polls show increasing percentages of Democratic primary voters unwilling to accept the rejection of their candidate. Both candidates have an incentive to attack on grounds that will weaken the other in the general election, as Clinton has already started to do with her “red phone” ad.
All of this is a windfall, surely, for McCain — unless he forgets that his party is in trouble and that he needs to make an affirmative case for himself and his policies. And loudly enough to overcome the din as Clinton and Obama pummel each other.
That last bit is very, very important for we GOPers. We must not even for a moment think that because the Democrats are beating each other up that we’ll cruise to victory. We’re still behind in national polling and in fundraising and while we have, I think, the best man to deflate whichever part of HillBama comes out on top, it will still take an intense effort to do so. Remember that GOPers – if you don’t want President Obama or President Hillary in January, then commit yourself right now to the longest, hardest political fight you’ve ever seen.
Meanwhile, however, the Democrats are in a pickle right now – and deservedly so, as they’ve spent most of the past 40 years playing gender and racial politics against us, and now they’re caught in a web of their own deceit. Really cool, huh? To think that they’ve been saying we’re the racists and sexists, and it will have to be Democrats who either reject a woman or reject a black man! Personally, I’m still thinking that Obama has the inside track to the nomination, but only just – Hillary is a very seasoned campaigner and a very down and dirty politician; Obama will have to call up a level of strength and hardness which have not been evident in his campaign to date.
Blogs For Victory 
I’ve been increasingly alarmed at the racist undertones, which rapidly became prominent themes, of the Obama campaign. This has been very carefully crafted to set up a firestorm of allegations of “racism” if he is not elected, or if he is elected and then fails miserably.
All these years, sincere people of all races have been working to try to erase the barriers between races, only to have them spring back up again thanks to the callous manuevering of the Obama campaign people.
I have been listening to some liberal talk radio recently, trying to figure out what is going on over there. The whining and bitching and moaning and attack modes of the trolls who insist on polluting this web site are not typical of the average sincere liberal, so I needed to try to find places where they express themselves.
I haven’t been able to listen to a lot, as I am so far out in the boonies I don’t get many radio stations, but I was closer to cities a few times and could pick up some Airhead America—true, that appeals more to the troll population than to middle-of-the-road Dems, but it was all I could find.
And all I heard—-ALL—was Identity Politics, unless it was BDS coupled with Identity Politics. It was “It’s time for a black man to be president” or “It’s time for a woman to be president”. The closest anyone could get to an issue was along the lines “We need a change from the Bush years and all the damage he has done to the country…” followed by one of the former comments.
Same old same old, not a thought to be found, not an issue to be addressed, not a vision that went beyond the feeling of entitlement of one group or another.
I still have faith in Middle America, that vast number of average people who think for themselves, who are not swayed by cheap emotional demagoguery, who understand economics, who are not so shallow that all that matters to them is ‘getting’ someone else just because he has more money than they do, who understand the dangers facing this country, who are not steeped in doom and gloom and America-hatred and misery and who don’t think this is a terrible country.
I was right in 2000 and 2004—-I hope not much has changed.
Mark,
I can’t tell you what it’s like in other states, but the people I talked to today at the Wyoming caucus all seemed ready to support either Obama or Clinton, regardless of who got the nomination. The vote at our caucus was about as close you could get, with Obama willing by 12 votes, but the people who made the nominating speeches for each candidate were all applauded.
As much as I hate to admit it, i think McCain is making the wise choice in appealing to the middle ground voters, the folks that can vote either Dem or GOP. Conservatives will come around, realizing that McCain is better then any Dem. McCain will bring so many of the folks who were not so much voting for Kerry as voting against Bush in 2004 over to McCains camp, as he patiently highlights his credentials over Hillary’s or Obama’s.
The election will probably be close in the electoral college, but, McCain should win.
Besides, I’m not sure that even the feelings based Dems can keep the energy up thru November, especially if the Obamessiah is the candidate. It’s a lot to ask of the voters to follow a guy who represents mostly nothing.
William Teach,
McCain has a very difficult task. He is trying to woo the far right, while keeping the middle ground voters (his base). If he continues to slide right (as he has done in the last two weeks), will he lose those of us who are pretty tired of the current administration?
Obama and Clinton going at each other with hammers and sickles. Gonna be bloody for sure and the fight will last a long time. Fun to watch and I don’t even care who wins. This is like watching a dog fight only it is legal.
This all reminds me of 1976, when Ford and Reagan were vying for the GOP nomination, while Jimmy Carter could joke, “We’ll take on the Republican Party, no matter which Republican Party they send against us.” Now McCain has Carter’s luxury of sitting back and watching the other party’s fray, putting in his $0.02 whenever he so chooses.
(Yes, I’m old enough to remember 1976, but was not old enough to vote that year.)
McCain has a very difficult task. He is trying to woo the far right, while keeping the middle ground voters (his base).
I don’t think McCain’s task is that difficult. He mainly has to convince people to the right of his base that he’s to the right of Clinton or Obama, which isn’t really saying much. There will likely be some on the right who won’t be satisfied with McCain, and they’ll find someone for whom to cast a protest vote, but I think that at least some in the mainline right will find McCain to be adequate, though not ideal.
Obama and Clinton going at each other with hammers and sickles.
Gotta like the humorous exaggeration. These two might not be genuine hammer and sickle wielding communists, but they’re about as leftward as anyone seeking the Dem nominee in recent memory. In his case, the most liberal member of the Senate.
“I don’t think McCain’s task is that difficult. He mainly has to convince people to the right of his base that he’s to the right of Clinton or Obama, which isn’t really saying much.”
I’m sure he will convince the right. The questions is; Will he be able to keep the middle? How many people in the middle are willing to put up with another 4 years of Bush policies?
Both Obama and Clinton keep giving McCain ammo to blast either one (or both).
Obama’s hypocrisy regarding NAFTA, and Clinton’s laughable claims of ‘experience’ can be used over and over again.
If the media really takes a close look at Obama, and try to identify the truth in his issues, less than half of America will vote for him. Thats what happened to Gore and Kerry. Charismatic empty suits will get boring, fast.
The November election will be about such issues as the recession the Republicans have left us, the $4 gasoline the Republicans have left us, the trampling of our Constituitional rights in the name of fear, and the Iraq civil war the neocon Republicans have left us in. Voters won’t give a damn what Hillary said to Barrack in March.
In other words, janie is counting on more than half of the American voters buying into the same mean-spirited, vicious, fact-deficient pack of lies she holds so dear.
“going at each other with hammers and sickles…”
I love it. It’s great to find some humor here, after the constant whining of the Libs.
Casper, first you need to define the “Bush policies” and explain what you like and don’t like about each one. Then you need to understand that when you actually do lay out the “Bush policies” as they really are, and not as they are portrayed by the radicals and the Agenda Media, there are going to be a lot of people who LIKE those policies, and DO want them to continue.
You know, REAL policies, like lower tax rates for all, and a strong national defense.
You are a teacher. You should be better at analytical thought. For example, you should be able to tell the difference between a “policy” and an “outcome” and you should surely be able to tell that the eventual outcome is not necessarily what you see partway through the event.
If a football team is behind 14-21 at the half, would you say the “policy” of the coach was to lose? Would you say that, based on that score, he WOULD lose? Let’s say his team never does catch up—was his “policy” to never catch up?
It is this sloppiness of language that marks the insincere Lefty. Sincere people want to know the truth even when there is the risk it might not jibe with their own biases or preferences. The insincere will play with language, tolerate or even promote inacuracy in speech, if they think it will advance their agendas.
We really need teachers willing to take the risks of uncovering things which they didn’t want to find. It is intellectually dishonest to just dislike Bush, and pretend that it is an objective disagreement with his “policies” if you can’t give specific examples.
So, if you are willing to be honest, you will explain Bush’s actual policies, and then what you find objectionable about them, and not hide behind vague and inaccurate generalities.
Almiranta: Which of those thing Plainjane stated,are “fact deficient”?
Yakkity, it would be easier to ask me when she’s ever right.
OK, maybe it happened once when I wasn’t looking. Unlike a lot of you Lefty agitators, I do have to work for a living, so I don’t catch every golden syllable that drips from her keyboard.
But for tonight:
“the recession the Republicans have left us…..”
except so far there isn’t one, though keep hoping, janie and yaks—remember, what is bad for the country is good for the Dems..
“the $4 gasoline the Republicans have left us…”
not yet, but again, keep your fingers crossed, etc etc….
“.. the trampling of our Constituitional rights…”
not at all, though you do love to insist that it is so…
“…. in the name of fear…”
utter nonsense.
“…. and the Iraq civil war…”
it’s not a “civil war” you silly twit…
“… the neocon Republicans have left us in.”
Make up your mind—-ooops, “mind”. Skipping over the mindless but cherished incantation of “neocon” the whole Iraq/civil war bleat is pure nonsense.
Except to janie’s fellow travellers, who eat this crap up with a spoon.
“Obama and Clinton going at each other with hammers and sickles.” – Michael
LoL! Too funny, Michael! Bwahaha!
🙂
This part of the original post made me laugh:
“To think that they’ve been saying we’re the racists and sexists, and it will have to be Democrats who either reject a woman or reject a black man!”
Mark, you really insult the intelligence of your readership.
The Democrats had a woman, a black American, and a Hispanic American among their initial candidates. The Republicans had all white men.
Can you honestly keep a straight face as you attempt to portray the Clinton/Obama battle as if the Democrats are demonstrating racism or sexism by “rejecting” one of these final two contenders?
And more importantly, are B4V readers ever really fooled by this kind of “journalism?” How are book sales, Mark? Care to speculate as to why your mighty tome hasn’t found an audience?
After all the rhetoric, etc., one thought; Comrade Obama should be very careful or he might just get Fostered (as in Vincent Foster.)