USA Presidential Politics - 2008

[melliedee]

I think Clinton wasted a genuine opportunity to extend her hand (one offered to her by Obama on several occasions) and let him have his moment as the winner of a long, hard fought contest. It was petty and self-absorbed. I always thought her VP shot was gone with the Kennedy comment, but now I think she really wants it. Though, maybe not, as last night was not a good way to go about getting that result.

The contrast with McCain is good to see.

[Jacko]

Originally Posted by melliedee

I think Clinton wasted a genuine opportunity to extend her hand (one offered to her by Obama on several occasions) and let him have his moment as the winner of a long, hard fought contest. It was petty and self-absorbed. I always thought her VP shot was gone with the Kennedy comment, but now I think she really wants it. Though, maybe not, as last night was not a good way to go about getting that result.

The contrast with McCain is good to see.

Yes, it certainly seemed so to me as well....I think the differences in the content and approach of all three speeches were very good for people to consider.....as, IMO, after a VERY long primary season, all three candidates had the opportunity to highlight and summarize their strengths and beliefs, or their weaknesses as the case may be, at the end of the Democratic primary for the viewing public to see.

For me it was plain to see who looked and sounded more presidential last night.

It's our time (ALL of us) to offer a new direction for the country.

[ryberg]

Pursuant to my question of yesterday --

Originally Posted by ryberg

How do you run a campaign in which your opponent can just trot out videos in which the person you chose as your running mate repeatedly says you're much less qualified than that same opponent?

-- the RNC has already made it time for the answer:



Ben Smith of Politico comments on it (here):

It is (yet another) reason that the notion of a joint ticket seems so utterly remote.

Gee, maybe your party does in fact have to pay a price in terms of its chances in the general election when you stand up and say, during the campaign, that its front-runner and your rival is much less qualified than the other party's nominee.

Steve

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by ryberg

Gee, maybe your party does in fact have to pay a price in terms of its chances in the general election when you stand up and say, during the campaign, that its front-runner and your rival is much less qualified than the other party's nominee.

Steve

I also heard an interesting commentary that not only could they not run together, but that McCain will then choose a women VP to go after that vote. Whose our short list of GOP women?

[roni]

Originally Posted by melliedee

I also heard an interesting commentary that not only could they not run together, but that McCain will then choose a women VP to go after that vote. Whose our short list of GOP women?

That Texas Senator??
Anne Coulter??

[jtm1631]

Originally Posted by ryberg

Well tonight's speech should be something, but I tell you, at least for those of us not yet born by (or much before) August 28th, 1963, the speech Obama gives at the convention on August 28th, 2008 may well be the speech of our lifetimes.

I look forward to it with great anticipation, and will watch it with my wife and children.

Steve

Agreed. August 28, 2008 should be a historic night and one which I hope my children will remember for the rest of their lives.

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by melliedee

I also heard an interesting commentary that not only could they not run together, but that McCain will then choose a women VP to go after that vote...

it was clearly the consensus among the many analysts on CNN last night, at least, that McCain's speech was an effort to reach out to Clinton supporters obviously disaffected (or worse) by Clinton's loss and obviously now not (yet) being urged by her to get behind the party's nominee.

I don't know if anyone saw Larry King last night, but there was a pretty hilarious exchange where a woman who was identified as a Republican straegist was trying in a moment of laughing desperation to get the Clinton representative to say that Obama had won and was the nominee, and she just wouldn't do it. In fact at one point she said, "When it is clear who the nominee will be..." At which point you could see the other woman throw up her hands, still laughing, and say, "This is ridiculous!" Later she said she was looking at her Blackberry and could assure everyone there that the Republicans, at least, think Barack Obama is the nominee and that that's who they're running against in November and planning for now.

Another CNN guy noted that Hubert Humphrey was not still contesting the 1968 race for the nomination; still another wondered aloud if Clinton wouldn't offer Obama the VP slot.

Steve

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by ryberg

I don't know if anyone saw Larry King last night, but there was a pretty hilarious exchange where a woman who was identified as a Republican straegist was trying in a moment of laughing desperation to get the Clinton representative to say that Obama had won and was the nominee, and she just wouldn't do it. In fact at one point she said, "When it is clear who the nominee will be..." At which point you could see the other woman throw up her hands, still laughing, and say, "This is ridiculous!" Later she said she was looking at her Blackberry and could assure everyone there that the Republicans, at least, think Barack Obama is the nominee and that that's who they're running against in November and planning for now.

Another CNN guy noted that Hubert Humphrey was not still contesting the 1968 race for the nomination; still another wondered aloud if Clinton wouldn't offer Obama the VP slot.

Steve

Then we have the inevitable sports analogies. Can you imagine if this were the Super Bowl? A close game, the winning touchdown scored at the last very second, the crowd goes wild! The winning team hoists their quarterback on their shoulders...and, wait a minute...the other team is also lifting their quarterback up? WTF? Do we need to go down to the locker room and "decide" what to do? At best, it's a buzzkill for the winners. Who the heck are we supposed to drench in Gatorade? Anderson Cooper? At worst, it's an indication of a larger divide, an unwillingness to advocate for the much touted party unity.

[Jacko]

While I know that ryberg can be ...well, er...enthusiastic about his opinions regarding Hillary....does anyone else feel like he was just a little more vindicated last night after watching what Hillary did at her speech?

roni, I would also be truly interested in how her speech last night made you feel, as one of her supporters, and whether you think she did the right approach..for her, and/or for our party. Do you think her speech, lacking a concession and with the appeal to her supporters to write in and tell her what they think she should do going forward, well, do you think that was potentially divisive in our party and a potentially irresponsible approach for her to take at this point?

[See Turtle]

Originally Posted by ryberg

Not to mention all those video excerpts of her saying McCain is much more qualified!

Oh, man...

How do you run a campaign in which your opponent can just trot out videos in which the person you chose as your running mate repeatedly says you're much less qualified than that same opponent?

Steve

It worked out okay for Reagan/Bush, even after the Voodoo Economics remarks.

One of the CNN talking heads this morning, I'm not sure which pundit it was as I was not looking at the box at the time, said the following:

If Obama chooses Hillary Clinton as his running mate, his next move should be to hire a food taster.

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by See Turtle

It worked out okay for Reagan/Bush, even after the Voodoo Economics remarks.

Well that's fair enough, and I know there are other cases of candidates being more bitter rivals during the campaign and then uniting on the ticket and succeeding.

I would be interested to hear if there is another such case, however, where the losing rival repeatedly said the winner and nominee was significantly less qualified for office than the opposing party's nominee. The other comments I think are not perhaps so damning in their content (that he's out of touch with the people, for example) just by themselves (although there is quite a collection of them, and I can imagine a sort of "Clinton's Greatest Hits" video compilation of them along the lines of the Wright videos, making the rounds as viral things, even if not put together more officially by the GOP). And comments from others, like the ones in that clip from Edwards, Biden or even Bill Clinton, are also not so damning, if the person in question is not chosen as the running mate.

But the VP of a ticket having repeatedly said that the head of the same ticket is really unqualified for office, unlike the head of the opposing party's ticket?

Steve

[ryberg]

And speaking of Anderson Cooper, evidently I am NOT the only one with a crush on Donna Brazile, lately!





Steve

[Sol]

Originally Posted by melliedee

I also heard an interesting commentary that not only could they not run together, but that McCain will then choose a women VP to go after that vote. Whose our short list of GOP women?

Condeleeza Rice.

[roni]

Originally Posted by Jacko

roni, I would also be truly interested in how her speech last night made you feel,

Here is what I wrote to her on her website's feedback form

I am a Hillary supporter. I voted for her in the Oregon primary.

I thought last night was a celebration of egocentrism on the the part of the Senator at a time that called for party-centrism. It is past time to concede and to start working for the election of Barack Obama. Please start today.

[roni]

Originally Posted by Sol

Condeleeza Rice.

That would be too scrumptious for the Democrats, so I suspect it will not happen.