Here's the deal with Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Barack Obama.
--If the election is Hillary Clinton vs. Mitt Romney, Hillary will probably win.
--If the election is Hillary Clinton vs. John McCain, then John McCain certainly could win.
BUT
--if the election is John McCain vs. Barack Obama, it's a fair fight. McCain still might win, but Obama can definitely beat him.
The only candidate the Democrats have to worry about is McCain; no matter who wins the Democratic primary, s/he will beat Romney. So that doesn't matter. Romney is not going to be President. And the rest...are dead in the water. Bye, Giuliani.
So now, the Democrats have to prepare for their one big threat--and the only person who can take on McCain, should he win the nomination, is Barack Obama. Therefore, they are just getting him ready.
Okay, I'm watching the State Of The Union, and George Bush is wearing so much makeup.They just showed Laura Bush--who is my absolute favorite person in our government right now--and my friend screamed. "Oh my God, there's Laura," he says. "The only thing she has done in the past 8 years since her husband has been in office is get a face lift."
Everyone is clapping, looking so happy and enthusiastic. And Hillary is just sitting there, calmly glaring straight ahead, wearing her bright red dress. She looks like the lady in Sixth Sense who goes to her own daughter's funeral in a red dress, and is later found out to have poisoned the kid to death. I love Hillary. She would scare the hell out of me if we were ever in the same room together, but that's part of the charm.
George just warned against "false populism in our country." Do you think he knows what "false populism" means? Methinks not.
Anyway--
People are weary of the Clinton/Bush/Bush/Clinton dynasty, they want change. And the days of Evangelical Republican control is over, thank God, so everyone is rushing to the middle. McCain is more legitimately moderate than Hillary. Plus he's more likeable, to be honest.
I like Barack too. Although I think he's a little green around the gills. He's not very tough yet. But maybe he can get there. And he's a good speaker, but sometimes his beautifully-phrased words don't really say that much.





I adore your writing- your comments are usually so dead-on. Both politically and in terms of fashion. :D
I honestly wouldn't mind either McCain or Obama, which is nice. I kind of like this moderate semi-bipartisanship as opposed to rabid anti-Republicanism/anti-Democratism. I feel like we're going to have a few good years ahead. Then again, anything would be better than where we are right now.
Posted by: Katie | January 28, 2008 at 06:40 PM
As a conservative independent (best term I can think of), I think you're likely to see more "conservatives" jump ship for Obama than "liberals" jump ship for any of the Republican nominees.
In my mind, McCain is a liberal in Republican clothing. With a McCain v. Clinton choice, I'm going with McCain. A McCain v. Obama race, I'm going Obama.
Never liked the Clintons, never will. Never liked Evangelical Christian control either.
But I am glad Gorgeous is back. Open a can of StarKist in celebration!
Posted by: MkeLaurie | January 28, 2008 at 06:58 PM
Wait, McCain is green? You mean Obama, right? I've not picked a Dem. candidate (I know I won't vote for any of the Republicans... McCain I would have voted for 8 years ago, but not now)
I actually could be a Hillary supporter, and don't completely understand the hatred towards her. Even a female friend of mine who would vote for Bill again in a nanosecond, can't STAND her. I question whether or not race is the final hurdle, but sexism (or should I say genderism? Mysogyny and homophobia are alive and well in the US, in my opinion) My only problem with being a Hillary supporter is that for whatever reason, right or wrong, she is a devisive person for so so many, and we don't need that right now in our country.
I'm supposed to go caucus next Saturday, and I'm still at a loss as to who to campaign for.
(and UGH, can't stand Laura... talks like she knew everything about education because she was a librarian. Librarians rock, but they don't necessarily have a clue what regular classroom teachers go through)
Posted by: Erica | January 28, 2008 at 07:13 PM
I think you're right about Obama's electability, though John Edwards would anihiliate any republican in a general election and the media has virtually ignored his campaign. I like the prospect of a woman or non-white guy in the oval office, but making sure a democrat is elected is more important than the symbolism of a minority on the ticket at this time.
Laura Bush is a missed opportunity, she really had no project or mission. I can't believe you like her.
Also, when the fuck do we get a fag in the white house? At least Hillary has the perception of dykiness amongst conservatives.
Posted by: Gaycondo | January 28, 2008 at 09:10 PM
You think McCain is fit to be a diplomat? You're kidding yourself! He will follow a warrior's path - that is unless he's just lying to get elected. I really don't trust that guy. Remember he's the one who forgave Bush after the vile attacks of 2000. Yup, with tail between the legs and all.
Posted by: Marie | January 28, 2008 at 10:11 PM
I think you might be on to something here...
Posted by: blackbird | January 29, 2008 at 03:52 AM
You're assuming we still still have a choice. If the fourth estate won't even give Edwards a forum, doesn't that tell you that the election has already been pre-determined?
Because both parties are corrupt, motivated first by greed, and bought and paid for by the moguls who own the media, how can anyone think their vote will matter at this point in our "democracy?"
Posted by: Joan | January 29, 2008 at 04:57 AM
"I like the prospect of a woman or non-white guy in the oval office, but making sure a democrat is elected is more important than the symbolism of a minority on the ticket at this time."
Gaycondo--I agree!
Posted by: maggie | January 29, 2008 at 06:49 AM
I think everyone is being very naive about the fact that the republicans have literally stolen the election the last 2 times.
Why wouldn't they do it again?
Posted by: jwaterfalls | January 29, 2008 at 06:55 AM
Can someone tell me how Obama moves us forward...to a new era in politics? Aside from just saying that's what he'll do? I just don't get it.
I used to want him, until I came to the conclusion that all he evers says is that he's for change. That's it. OK. Great! I like change. Now what?
And I'm not so sure that McCain will beat Hillary.
Posted by: Jason | January 29, 2008 at 08:27 AM
It's all a crap shoot. We don't really know who can beat who because it all depends on who the media decides to back. That's the ugly truth. If we have an Obama/McCain match up and they decide that McCain is too old, then that is all the news will focus on until the American public is saying it in their sleep.
If on the other hand the press decides that Obama does not have enough experience, then no matter what he does, it will be skewed to show his "inexperience" until the public has no choice but to believe it.
The core of voters who actually think for themselves doesn't stand a chance.
Posted by: David | January 29, 2008 at 10:14 AM
Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton is what we could be up for... That's 28 years...
Sweet?
Posted by: Andrew | January 29, 2008 at 11:15 AM
I think you highly underestimate a large part of the US that still believes that Evangelical Republicans are a good thing and that religious views are the ONLY factor to consider in deciding who to vote for. Remember, there are tons of uneducated, uninformed people who watch nothing but Fox News and will blindly believe whatever they're told by a very biased media.
I don't want a Republican in the White House any more than you do, but you're lying to yourself if you think that people won't vote for Romney. Scary, I know.
Posted by: Jayne | January 29, 2008 at 11:38 AM
Jayne--
Romney isn't an Evangelical. He's Mormon. And there are LOTS of Evangelicals who don't believe that's a real religion.
Posted by: Dave | January 29, 2008 at 01:50 PM
Dave- Fair enough.
I never meant to insinuate that Romney was an evangelical...I simply meant to say that a lot of people take the candidate's willingness to discuss his or her religion and religious views to be the end-all-be-all of who should be president. Whether or not Romney gets support from the evangelical right, lots of people like the fact that he's openly discussing how religion plays into certain issues. I apologize for my misleading comments earlier...
Posted by: Jayne | January 29, 2008 at 01:58 PM
Jason - That's exactly what I feel about Obama. I like the guy. (I actually had sorta-sexy dream about him the other night, but that's neither here nor there.) However, I can only be so inspired before I need something meaty to grab on to. Hillary's been...giving me that meat. Weird sentence, I apologize.
Posted by: Charlotte | January 29, 2008 at 03:10 PM
For the people who are skeptical of Obama in regards to claiming he's all flash and no substance, he delineates his change and what he plans to do very effectively on his website. I became aware of it Saturday night when I went there to donate a small sum towards his fight against the Clintons. I beg of you all who want a democratic president, please go to his website now, read his propositions and donate! I know this was beat to death in the comments to a prior blog by Dan, but I can't overemphasize how badly the Democrats will lose if she is put up against ANY republican (except Huckabee). I'm sure those of you who stay informed, whether it's through Fox News, CNN, or whatever it is that draws you to pay attention, have seen that more and more major players of the Democratic establishment are backing Obama now. Don't be afraid of change, sometimes change is exemplified by new and green around the gills persons.
http://www.barackobama.com/index.php
Posted by: darryll | January 29, 2008 at 05:20 PM
I agree with your analysis completely! How did you get so smart??
My BIGGEST fear is that McCain will choose Florida Senator Mel Martinez to be his running mate in order to win Florida. Mel Martinez ran THE most anti-gay campaign in HISTORY to become Senator from Florida. The idea of him as VP terrifies me. I pray that Obama will select a VP who has equal ability to sway Florida to go for him. Is there such a person??
Posted by: Hephaestion | January 29, 2008 at 05:43 PM
I love any sentence that has the phrase "methinks" in it. By the way, how many times do you think Barack has heard that he is "such a good speaker." You surely are not using the racist phrase of "he's so well spoken." But it is hard to give a complement and not have it misconstrued.
Posted by: smaile | January 29, 2008 at 11:15 PM
But have you seen his Romney slagging gay-bashing ads? He's using the "I hate fags more than Mitch" pitch!
Getta grip!
Posted by: PG | January 30, 2008 at 12:13 AM
Darryll,
What Obama shows on his website are just proposals. That's it, which basically backs my feeling. All talk, no action.
Here's a good article that emphasizes this point - http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080211/younge
About Hillary not being able to defeat any Republican except Huck, which post of Dan's goes over that point in the comments? I do believe it will be a struggle for her against McCain, but no one else. And a struggle doesn't mean a loss.
Posted by: Jason | January 30, 2008 at 06:06 AM
Jason,
1. Correct they are proposals and plans. Which was my way of saying he's not just saying the word 'change' but not explaining how he wants to bring it about. What more can he do at this point, afterall he's not President yet so he can't start on them until that happens. Action doesn't happen until the starting gun goes off, and that's inaugaration day.
2. I read the article you posted, and I see nothing there that critiques Obama, or says he's all talk and no action. In fact it seems rather flattering of his momentum being built.
3. I'm lost as to why you are asking me about Dan. Dan doesn't seem to me to be so egocentric that all comments must only be about what he says. I'm sure he posted this and all of his blogs to engender discussion with not only himself, but within us commmentors.
But even with that being said, you're answer is here:
Dan's second sentence above was, "--If the election is Hillary Clinton vs. Mitt Romney, Hillary will probably win."
4. I challenge you to critique her in the same way, and tell me what all her talk is going to accomplish. Granted I'm only expressing my opinion, but I feel very strongly that if she is the nominee we will see one of the biggest one sided wins the republicans have had ever. We do not need someone so devisive and polarizing to lead our country. We need new and fresh ideas. Ideas it what elections are about. As I said previously, more and more major Democratic players are endorsing Obama, such as Jimmy Carter. Although technically he hasn't announced it, all the major media reported today how inspired Carter is by Obama.
Posted by: darryll | January 30, 2008 at 02:36 PM
Jason,
My bad...I guess you were asking me which post of Dan's I was beating to death my assertion that she will lose, it was in his blog: WHY I LOVED THE DEMOCRATIC DEBATE
sorry
Posted by: darryll | January 30, 2008 at 02:41 PM