Analysis and discussion of elections and opinion polls in Australia
New Hampshire thread
In a probably vain effort to maintain order around here, I will henceforth be running separate threads for discussion of the US presidential campaign. Here’s the first.
Author: William Bowe
William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.
View all posts by William Bowe
“governor of north or south carolina” hmmm just like running of mayor of South or North Sydney I guess.
Adam’s analysis is spot-on. The Dems will be crying if they knife Hillary in November the Republicans will absolutely go to town on Barrack Hussein Obama. Even if he somehow fluked a win – he would be another Jimmy Carter and keep them out for a decade or 2 thereafter.
The Audacity of Hope more like the Audacity of my bottom.
Barack Obama is hot favourite for the next president of the US.
So either the bias of Adam and Edward is showing or the betting markets and polls are wrong.
I know what I think.
Edward: What exactly would Obama do wrong that would keep the Democrats out for 10 years? Whereas you seem to contend Bush’s legacy has done no lasting damage to the Republicans.
I have felt for sometime now Obama will be swiftboated (or whatever group of liars the republicans digup is called this time) for sometime now. Almost all of the Hillary dirt is there already and, in MHO some of the foolish Dems are are factoring that dirt, but not factoring in how long the repulicans have to maul Obama if he gets the nomination.
I’m not sure Hilary will win, you’ve got to remember this is the bunch of clowns that elected little Bush the second time, having not done so the first time, but I’m pretty sure that once he leaves the Dem bubble of nominations he will find life a lot lot harder, and even a super floored Rudi might be able to defeat him.
I hate, on principal to agree with Edward or Glen but I think I do.
One last point the polls are stupid polls, they are all tainted by the nomination race, if Hilary got the nom the Obama fans have to chose between Hilary and the repub nom, American’s are stupider than I think if they go from Obama, past Hilary to a republican.
It is OK Jasmine by year end you and I will be in violent agreement on many many things.
Final point too wild speculation posed as a question – which group of supporters are more likely to get out and support a same party opponent should they lose, Hilary supporters or Obama supporters?
Assuming equal numbers of race only and sex only voters you’d have to think there is some chance the ‘change the world’ Obama supporters would switch to a Hilary campaign against which ever bloke get the republican gig. Or perhaps I’m speculating that Hilary would have a greater fall off the wagon entirely factor with voters not making it to Obama.
I’m not very well schooled in the issues of US politics, but it seems to me that this is far from a whitewash (no pun intended) for the Dems.
1st – Wasn’t there a release of the pressure valve of anti-Republican sentement at the mid -term elections? Why is the next Presidential race necessarily about repeating the punishment of the Republicans….
2nd – From the little of McCain I have seen, he has an entirely different vibe from Bush….Whenever he talks about Iraq, he seems to speak with calm competence rather than the comic book morality we hear from Bush
3rd – Bush’s lanslide victory 4 years ago was driven by some hard core support in the middle of the US – has that disappeared? I haven’t seen any polling to support that notion
You are a Rudd fan now Edward? I’m cooling a bit.
Marko # 36… Thank you, much appreciated.
Based on what I have just seen in Australia, I can only wonder this: if Obama wins the nomination and the Republicans go to town on his “weaknesses”, how many voters will actually care?
The Democrats will likely win, barring major stuffups, with any of Obama, Clinton or Edwards, though I have the most reservations about Clinton (not because she is female, but because she has a lot of historical baggage.) The Republicans are in a mess primarily because none of their candidates are anywhere near ideal, and also because they have been wrong-footed by the war in Iraq dragging on as if forever. Even by the standards of a very religious nation, Romney is too weirdly religious, and Huckabee too earnestly so. Giuliani is too liberal for their support base and his record is nowhere near as good as he makes it out to be, McCain is too old and too hawkish, Thompson is failing to inspire and Paul is an ideological one-trick pony. I think McCain is their best bet because he is a figure who commands respect and he can pick up the pieces most effectively if the Democrats stuff up.
Mr Sqiggle @ 57
the pressure valve of anti-republicanism has not been released by the mid-terms. Their is still deep deep resentment of what they have done on many levels. They have no chance of winning.
what the mid-terms have done however is waken the democrat supporters up to the fact that not any Dem will do as long as the Repugs are outed. The Dem led Congress has been a massive disappointed to most supporters.
2 years ago Hillary would have bolted in the Nom because she was the establishment candidate but now it is a different story after the people have seen the establishment Dems like Hillary, Pelosi, Ried, Stoyer, Levin etc do absolutely nothing to change anything.
They want change and by God they’re going to get change.
Hillary knows she is toast. her tears yesterday were as telling as Howard’s tearful plea on 7.30 Report. Realisation is emotional stuff.
I’m not saying Obama is a saviour, but he is relatively likeable, relatively inspiring and gives hope of change.
When the attack dogs of the Repugs attack someone likeable who carries the peoples hopes (unlike John Kerry), it will backfire.
Kinda like it backfired on the semi likeable and fresh Rudd.
The Clinton machine is as ruthless as the Repugs and they know they’re beaten.
Where is Possum when you need him to predict a statistically probable 48 state victory for Obama in November?
He (possum) probably has proof that Obama will in the general election win Alaska and Utah too!
Can somebody work out what on earth these figures are?
Is there anyone left in Utah? I thought they were all over here! Everytime I try to cross the intersection at the local shopping centre, there they are , all from Utah! At least Mitt Romney is at home in the USA.
Obama seems to me to be the Racist Candidate.
Racists from the Right will hate him for the color of his skin.
Racists from the Left will love him for the same reason.
True, his skin is black, but he does not have a racial inheritance based on slave ancestors. But his skin color is the basis of his political presence.
Let’s face it… it can’t be experience, because he has next to none. He is a pretty, black face, and that’s about all.
If he is elected it will be because he is a black man, not because he has anything in common with either the whites who will vote agaist him, or the descendants of slaves and their supporters who claim him – wrongly, but conveniently – as one of their own.
He probably has many fine qualities, but being a genuine American negro – in the ethnic, physically descriptive sense of the word – is not one of them.
Hence: the Racist Candidate.
I personally don’t have an opinion either for or against him. I don’t care if he’s black, white or brindled. But his color is the great unspoken issue – love him or loathe him, take him or leave him – of this election, and quite mistakenly so.
America has long been a parody of itself. Now it is parody of a parody. Obama’s candidature is proof of the fact that modern American politics is kitschier than a cheap afternoon soap opera.
Adam: Given that a lot of politics in the US seems to be about getting out the base vote rater than winning the middle, are you sure that Hillary is such a sure bet? It seems that nothing unites the Republicans like their (rather irrational) hatred of Hillary. Their own field is vastly uninspiring to their base: a mormon, a slightly too crazy evangelical, a pro-choice pro-gay liberal, a lightweight actor and McCain, who might be argued to be a bit too pro-Bush for his own good. Most of those guys will have trouble turning out the base, but if they’re running against Hillary? It’s the one thing they’ve been praying for. I doubt even the racist vote against Obama in the south could get them turning out as well.
I agree that McCain is probably their best bet, as he seems most palatable (or least unpalatable?) to their base and has completely sold out to get support of the RNC. The important question is whether he’s been too pro-Bush administration (ie does that even matter to the Republican base)?
It does seem like Obama will turn out the Democrat vote like no-one else given the high participation in Iowa, but perhaps those numbers just show the strength of the Democratic field. Democrats could happily vote for any of the three current main contenders, I reckon.
On a separate note, the obvious thing for Obama to do would be to pick someone like Richardson as a running-mate to counter the foreign-policy-lightweight tag.
I fear if Obama gets up some American loon (and there are a plenty)will do something terrible.
Does anyone else fear the same
No my fear is that Obama is too inexperienced to be in control of US military weapons & policy
Pity Gore did not run…suspect he may have won
as it seems the Democrats will win the Presidency
Maybe of interest. Rod Quinn, standing in for Delroy is doing Obama as the issue of the day. On within minutes. 891 SA.
Ron @ 69: What do you mean? Afraid he’ll illegally invade other countries at will, kill and rape a whole bunch of their people and basically f%$# the entire country up for decades to come?
Seriously though, Hillary was the one who said that a president should “never take their finger off the nuclear button”. I’d be more worried if she got in.
Absolutely, Centaur. As not only Jen has posted. I worry that my offering is foolish and miniscule, but this is it.
On the serious matter of Obama and longevity, in my mention of the terrifying thought, earlier but barely, as if even words could somehow conjure the thing. Obama was provided Secret Service protection well before it was usually afforded a candidate. Last year, I think, which gave me pause at the time.
Remembering as an early teenager the bright morning, on entering my mother’s bedroom, having absorbed that I really was hearing this, over and over, placing my trannie into my mother’s hands as some kind of evidence, saying, I think President Kennedy has been shot. Mum’s horror and disbelief. The mixture of pain, enormous sympathy, realisation of a dashed hope and dream as I understood Kennedy, even at that age, I vividly recall. I remember too, the Cuban crisis, in my classroom, listening in certainty to the drone of a plane overhead. The bomb did not fall, that day.
Anyway, this is a bit of my life. And without doubt part of what shaped me.
Chilling and worse to contemplate any such fate for this candidate, or that nation.
Hmmm, Bushfire Bill. Was that you on the wireless? Saying:
‘I personally don’t have an opinion either for or against him. I don’t care if he’s black, white or brindled’.
Dave from Albury,
Clinton had no less of an armchair ride into the Senate than Obama.
let’s not forget that jfk started the vietnam war, presided over its expansion and began the tradition of unilateral us brinkmanship that resulted in lots of smouldering proxy wars around the world. beware the messianic politician. jfk is like benazir bhutto, someone who looks a lot better dead than alive.
when you look at obama’s positions re: iraq, israel (undying loyalty) and the middle east in general, his opinions on the role of the us, there is very little daylight between him, the other dems and the republicans. it’s one thing to talk about eventually leaving iraq one day, jfk opposed vietnam and wanted to leave before he became president and poured hundreds of thousands of troops in. it’s another thing entirely to say you’re leaving and set a date with troop numbers like rudd has done. maybe i’m wrong, and i hope i am, but i don’t think so.
‘Ullo me Lovelies! Fancy finding you mob of desperates here. And how very kind of you, William, to help us in our weakness with a “separate thread”.
Adam and Eddy, I’m very much in accord with Kirribilli Removals. Reckon you’re both dead wrong about Obama. He has the game to rise above the flak of swiftboaters and bigots.
Posted this at LP ealier today.
[Jan 8th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
“New Hampshire Weather Forecast
Unusually warm temperatures and clear skies will likely lead to record turnout in tomorrow’s New Hampshire primary.
Key finding: Clinton has regained some support among woman voters age 25 to 49 and that appears to have stopped her slide. This race still turns on age, however, with Obama leading Clinton 43% to 27% among voters age 18 to 64 (comprising 83% of the vote), while Clinton leads among voters 65 years and older 50% to 25%.
Quote of the Day
“You don’t want to be looking back five years from now and saying the American people really rose up and changed America, and I was sitting on the couch.”
– Sen. Barack Obama, quoted by NBC News, urging people in New Hampshire to vote tomorrow. ]
Francis at 9: above are excerpts from Taegan Goddard’s Political Wire. It’s worth a rung in your favorites column during this campaign.
CBet latest. There has been major movement.
President – WINNER
OBAMA, Barack 1.95
CLINTON, Hillary 3.50
MCCAIN, John 7.50
GIULIANI, Rudolph 8.00
ROMNEY, Mitt 13.00
HUCKABEE, Mike 14.00
BLOOMBERG, Michael 21.00
PAUL, Ron 26.00
EDWARDS, John 34.00
Obama has stormed into market favouritism in the last 48 hours.
Don’t wish to sound trite, but Significant History is happenin’ here.
If Obama stays alive, he’ll romp in. The guy is a vote magnet the likes of whom pop up only once every generation or two.
Hey all, i have a question for you poll gurus. I am surprised to see Obama go from about even to a 10% lead in the polls in 5 days in NH. Would you ever see anything like that in Australia? The avg American is surely no more fickle than your avg Aussie punter, so why the sudden and massive swing? For what it’s worth, Go Obama!
Because Obama’s victory in Iowa victory has increased his profile and standing elsewhere, including New Hampshire. A win in the first contest generates momentum heading into the second contest and so on. That’s what makes the early states so important.
In the Australian context we might think of Mundingburra 1996 or Frankston East 1999. In both instances, the party that did better than expected at the general election went on to enjoy an important victory at a crucial subsequent content.
From LA Times today: Look out Dems,……here come the BFG’s.
Looks to me like McCain will struggle for relevance in this campaign. There are good reasons why he is not the class candidate some here would have us believe.
79 Megan, why not link to accessible sites?
Ok,not just Dems….any bleeding-heart candidate who thinks that winner shouldn’t take all. Cringe to see such naked greed.
Steve,sorry, thought I had. Will go forage.
Steve, new to all this so pls excuse. Hope this works.
And one on ‘Change’ from The Nation,where the last paragraph hits it on the head:
“Where before it seemed that thick, impenetrable gloomy clouds were rolling across the landscape, a bright and shimmering but so far empty screen has been hung. Soon, something will be projected there. Then we’ll know what this season of change–or at least of the word “change”–meant.
Adam it is a county where the majority praise the lord, they may be looking for a messier, not solutions. As an aside you do sound a lot like Howard attacking Rudd, now how did that work out? Of cause on the logical plane you are right.
I think the democrats will win whoever, without the religious vote ( or the economical radical vote if HUCKABEE gets up) the republicans are nothing. Unfortunately I think Obama will be elected and Edwards will end up being president, the USA have form ( and I’m not willing to be as blunt as Phillip Adams).
A mountain out of a molehill here methinks…
While this oppinion is all interesting, it nowhere near alligns to polling and/or fact. Obama is well ahead in all betting markets, and the historical analogies would suggest that the leader after Iowa and New Hampshire goes on to win nomination. If Hillary can’t beat Obama, she doesn’t deserve the nomination.
For all the talk of Obama being in charge of weapons and the military and how scared that make us…please. A president like Obama would have offers of help flowing in from all sorts of advisors and experts. He’d be no less inept than someone who went into the job with more connections and legislative experience like, say, dubya.
And finally, on the point of attacks on lack of policy substance? That is not what wins or loses elections, either here (remember Rudds lack?) or abroad. The US voted for Jnr Bush cos they thought he was a good guy (and remembered the name from somewhere), Clinton cos he was charismatic, and Reagan cos he was folksey. Obama combines what was so immensely popular in those last two.
Oh and the ‘Hussein’ bit has already had one run. It was ceremonially dumped, seen through as more Rove-like muckraking, and ignored. Americans – even Republicans it would seem – like Obama, and dislike such attacks. I have no doubt some ‘swift-boaters’ will release ads calling Obama ‘BHO’, but I think that Roveism has passed its high water mark for the moment.
…dislike such attacks on particularly popular figures…
Turnout is huge and some towns look like running out of voting papers.
morning firends, and Glen-
todays favourite is … (and actualluy Hillary might borrow this one)-
“I want to thank you for taking time out of your day to come and witness my hanging.”
-At the dedication of his portrait, Austin Texas, Jan 4 , 2002.
JUst had a quick perusal of formed blogs :
B Bill
I disagree with your premise that Obama is only there because he is black. The man is showing some passion and vision and as naive as that might seem to hardened political cynics (yes, I mean you Adam), it is what people are crying out for. And it’s why we elected young Kevin.
Policies, debates, slogans whatever – if there is the possibility of change (even if it is only a perception) then people are jumping at it.
Nothing could be as awful as what we’ve had with the neocons taking us to an iillegal war, f@#king the environment and alllowing insane fundamentalists to influence public policy, to name a few issues.
Hillary is part of the establishment (and therefore the old order). Obama is new, committed and winning: that’s going to surge him ahead, and hipefully get him over the line.
The argument about experience doesn’t cut it, as a lot of people don’t value the way things have been done anyway. Ask Howard.
This from the NY Times magazine on electronic voting machines, it may not matter who wins the Dem nomination if the abomination of rigged voting machines can not be overcome. Most of these machines are manufactured by Diebold, a major contributor to the Republicans in the past:
“[Voting machines] fail unpredictably, and in extremely strange ways; voters report that their choices “flip” from one candidate to another before their eyes; machines crash or begin to count backward; votes simply vanish. (In the 80-person town of Waldenburg, Ark., touch-screen machines tallied zero votes for one mayoral candidate in 2006—even though he’s pretty sure he voted for himself.) Most famously, in the November 2006 Congressional election in Sarasota, Fla., touch-screen machines recorded an 18,000-person “undervote” for a race decided by fewer than 400 votes.”
“No Republican in the modern era has ever won the nomination without winning Iowa or New Hampshire. In this year where all bets seem to be off and something new happens every day, that trend seems like one that is destined to continue.”
Interesting that the latest poll had McCain falling away. It will be the most comical part of the campaign so far if he gets rolled today.
Glen — why the hate for Ron Paul? If I recall correctly, you’re a Liberal member, and the liberalism (US-Eng = libertarianism) he espouses is more or less what our Liberals are supposed to stand for.
I’m a Lib and if I was in the U.S. he would have all my support. Non-interference, less tax, individual rights? — I thought that was what we stood for.
Adam, I am not sure where all the hostility to Barack Obama comes from. From what i have read, he did not have an easy ride into the Senate, in fact he was a way-out outsider when he started that campaign (both in terms of getting democrat support and then beating the republican candidate).
On the issue of expierence and other bits mentioned above, it just reflects the Hillary song-book of a kitchen-sink attack on Obama:
From what i have heard from Hillary, all that she has said is that she has experience, but has not really actually explained why anyone should be interested in the experience she has: to what use will she put it? The only thing she has said is that she is afraid (fear campaign) that the country will go backwards, if she is not elected, which just smacks of arrogance and a sense of her being entitled to the presidency because she has done her 35 years of penance.
Well interesting, people thought Kerry was riding the anti-republican wave, people thought Kerry could rise above swift boating too … how did that go?
Some of the points above are interesting. The levels of complexity in the US system make it more fun, the dems should be trying to pick who is going to have most appeal in the swing states … I should go find my list of them.
“If Romney wins today, the key symbols could be a broken-down bus versus hundreds of cell phones. Yesterday, McCain’s auxiliary press bus broke down, months after the campaign downgraded its famed Straight Talk Express because of cash shortages.
Meanwhile, the Romney campaign had rented extra office space and laid in 270 cell phones to boost phone-banking capacity. On Sunday, the campaign reached 50,000 voters with telephone calls or a knock on the door, said Jim Merrill, Romney’s state director. Yesterday and today, Romney also deployed his five sons across the state.
At a 500-strong rally in Bedford last night, Romney described some family characteristics as told in a book about his great-great-grandfather.
“There’s an old family saying that if a Romney drowns in a river, look upstream for the body,” Romney said. “So regardless of how things are we’re going to keep battling and fighting, and so regardless of how things are, you can expect us in the fight every day, every night.”
Today, Romney will dispatch 20 passenger vans for get-out-the-vote efforts, Merrill said. For his part, McCain’s campaign will have vans in each of New Hampshire’s 10 counties, said Mike Dennehy, a top McCain strategist.
If television advertisements were decisive, Romney would win by a landslide. He’s spent nearly $4 million on ads on WMUR, the only statewide television channel, according to numbers compiled by Dante Scala, an assistant professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire.
That’s nearly four times the $1.1 million spent on WMUR ads by McCain, the next biggest-spender of the Republican race.
The Romney campaign hasn’t just been pricey, it’s also been precisely targeted. All along, Romney’s campaign has zeroed on New Hampshire’s Republican base, expecting the independents who can vote in either primary to flock to the Democratic race”
“governor of north or south carolina” hmmm just like running of mayor of South or North Sydney I guess.
Adam’s analysis is spot-on. The Dems will be crying if they knife Hillary in November the Republicans will absolutely go to town on Barrack Hussein Obama. Even if he somehow fluked a win – he would be another Jimmy Carter and keep them out for a decade or 2 thereafter.
The Audacity of Hope more like the Audacity of my bottom.
Barack Obama is hot favourite for the next president of the US.
So either the bias of Adam and Edward is showing or the betting markets and polls are wrong.
I know what I think.
Edward: What exactly would Obama do wrong that would keep the Democrats out for 10 years? Whereas you seem to contend Bush’s legacy has done no lasting damage to the Republicans.
I have felt for sometime now Obama will be swiftboated (or whatever group of liars the republicans digup is called this time) for sometime now. Almost all of the Hillary dirt is there already and, in MHO some of the foolish Dems are are factoring that dirt, but not factoring in how long the repulicans have to maul Obama if he gets the nomination.
I’m not sure Hilary will win, you’ve got to remember this is the bunch of clowns that elected little Bush the second time, having not done so the first time, but I’m pretty sure that once he leaves the Dem bubble of nominations he will find life a lot lot harder, and even a super floored Rudi might be able to defeat him.
I hate, on principal to agree with Edward or Glen but I think I do.
One last point the polls are stupid polls, they are all tainted by the nomination race, if Hilary got the nom the Obama fans have to chose between Hilary and the repub nom, American’s are stupider than I think if they go from Obama, past Hilary to a republican.
It is OK Jasmine by year end you and I will be in violent agreement on many many things.
Final point too wild speculation posed as a question – which group of supporters are more likely to get out and support a same party opponent should they lose, Hilary supporters or Obama supporters?
Assuming equal numbers of race only and sex only voters you’d have to think there is some chance the ‘change the world’ Obama supporters would switch to a Hilary campaign against which ever bloke get the republican gig. Or perhaps I’m speculating that Hilary would have a greater fall off the wagon entirely factor with voters not making it to Obama.
I’m not very well schooled in the issues of US politics, but it seems to me that this is far from a whitewash (no pun intended) for the Dems.
1st – Wasn’t there a release of the pressure valve of anti-Republican sentement at the mid -term elections? Why is the next Presidential race necessarily about repeating the punishment of the Republicans….
2nd – From the little of McCain I have seen, he has an entirely different vibe from Bush….Whenever he talks about Iraq, he seems to speak with calm competence rather than the comic book morality we hear from Bush
3rd – Bush’s lanslide victory 4 years ago was driven by some hard core support in the middle of the US – has that disappeared? I haven’t seen any polling to support that notion
You are a Rudd fan now Edward? I’m cooling a bit.
Marko # 36… Thank you, much appreciated.
Based on what I have just seen in Australia, I can only wonder this: if Obama wins the nomination and the Republicans go to town on his “weaknesses”, how many voters will actually care?
The Democrats will likely win, barring major stuffups, with any of Obama, Clinton or Edwards, though I have the most reservations about Clinton (not because she is female, but because she has a lot of historical baggage.) The Republicans are in a mess primarily because none of their candidates are anywhere near ideal, and also because they have been wrong-footed by the war in Iraq dragging on as if forever. Even by the standards of a very religious nation, Romney is too weirdly religious, and Huckabee too earnestly so. Giuliani is too liberal for their support base and his record is nowhere near as good as he makes it out to be, McCain is too old and too hawkish, Thompson is failing to inspire and Paul is an ideological one-trick pony. I think McCain is their best bet because he is a figure who commands respect and he can pick up the pieces most effectively if the Democrats stuff up.
Mr Sqiggle @ 57
the pressure valve of anti-republicanism has not been released by the mid-terms. Their is still deep deep resentment of what they have done on many levels. They have no chance of winning.
what the mid-terms have done however is waken the democrat supporters up to the fact that not any Dem will do as long as the Repugs are outed. The Dem led Congress has been a massive disappointed to most supporters.
2 years ago Hillary would have bolted in the Nom because she was the establishment candidate but now it is a different story after the people have seen the establishment Dems like Hillary, Pelosi, Ried, Stoyer, Levin etc do absolutely nothing to change anything.
They want change and by God they’re going to get change.
Hillary knows she is toast. her tears yesterday were as telling as Howard’s tearful plea on 7.30 Report. Realisation is emotional stuff.
I’m not saying Obama is a saviour, but he is relatively likeable, relatively inspiring and gives hope of change.
When the attack dogs of the Repugs attack someone likeable who carries the peoples hopes (unlike John Kerry), it will backfire.
Kinda like it backfired on the semi likeable and fresh Rudd.
The Clinton machine is as ruthless as the Repugs and they know they’re beaten.
Where is Possum when you need him to predict a statistically probable 48 state victory for Obama in November?
He (possum) probably has proof that Obama will in the general election win Alaska and Utah too!
Can somebody work out what on earth these figures are?
http://media.myfoxdc.com/YouDecide/race7.htm
Is there anyone left in Utah? I thought they were all over here! Everytime I try to cross the intersection at the local shopping centre, there they are , all from Utah! At least Mitt Romney is at home in the USA.
Obama seems to me to be the Racist Candidate.
Racists from the Right will hate him for the color of his skin.
Racists from the Left will love him for the same reason.
True, his skin is black, but he does not have a racial inheritance based on slave ancestors. But his skin color is the basis of his political presence.
Let’s face it… it can’t be experience, because he has next to none. He is a pretty, black face, and that’s about all.
If he is elected it will be because he is a black man, not because he has anything in common with either the whites who will vote agaist him, or the descendants of slaves and their supporters who claim him – wrongly, but conveniently – as one of their own.
He probably has many fine qualities, but being a genuine American negro – in the ethnic, physically descriptive sense of the word – is not one of them.
Hence: the Racist Candidate.
I personally don’t have an opinion either for or against him. I don’t care if he’s black, white or brindled. But his color is the great unspoken issue – love him or loathe him, take him or leave him – of this election, and quite mistakenly so.
America has long been a parody of itself. Now it is parody of a parody. Obama’s candidature is proof of the fact that modern American politics is kitschier than a cheap afternoon soap opera.
Adam: Given that a lot of politics in the US seems to be about getting out the base vote rater than winning the middle, are you sure that Hillary is such a sure bet? It seems that nothing unites the Republicans like their (rather irrational) hatred of Hillary. Their own field is vastly uninspiring to their base: a mormon, a slightly too crazy evangelical, a pro-choice pro-gay liberal, a lightweight actor and McCain, who might be argued to be a bit too pro-Bush for his own good. Most of those guys will have trouble turning out the base, but if they’re running against Hillary? It’s the one thing they’ve been praying for. I doubt even the racist vote against Obama in the south could get them turning out as well.
I agree that McCain is probably their best bet, as he seems most palatable (or least unpalatable?) to their base and has completely sold out to get support of the RNC. The important question is whether he’s been too pro-Bush administration (ie does that even matter to the Republican base)?
It does seem like Obama will turn out the Democrat vote like no-one else given the high participation in Iowa, but perhaps those numbers just show the strength of the Democratic field. Democrats could happily vote for any of the three current main contenders, I reckon.
On a separate note, the obvious thing for Obama to do would be to pick someone like Richardson as a running-mate to counter the foreign-policy-lightweight tag.
I fear if Obama gets up some American loon (and there are a plenty)will do something terrible.
Does anyone else fear the same
No my fear is that Obama is too inexperienced to be in control of US military weapons & policy
Pity Gore did not run…suspect he may have won
as it seems the Democrats will win the Presidency
Maybe of interest. Rod Quinn, standing in for Delroy is doing Obama as the issue of the day. On within minutes. 891 SA.
Ron @ 69: What do you mean? Afraid he’ll illegally invade other countries at will, kill and rape a whole bunch of their people and basically f%$# the entire country up for decades to come?
Seriously though, Hillary was the one who said that a president should “never take their finger off the nuclear button”. I’d be more worried if she got in.
Absolutely, Centaur. As not only Jen has posted. I worry that my offering is foolish and miniscule, but this is it.
On the serious matter of Obama and longevity, in my mention of the terrifying thought, earlier but barely, as if even words could somehow conjure the thing. Obama was provided Secret Service protection well before it was usually afforded a candidate. Last year, I think, which gave me pause at the time.
Remembering as an early teenager the bright morning, on entering my mother’s bedroom, having absorbed that I really was hearing this, over and over, placing my trannie into my mother’s hands as some kind of evidence, saying, I think President Kennedy has been shot. Mum’s horror and disbelief. The mixture of pain, enormous sympathy, realisation of a dashed hope and dream as I understood Kennedy, even at that age, I vividly recall. I remember too, the Cuban crisis, in my classroom, listening in certainty to the drone of a plane overhead. The bomb did not fall, that day.
Anyway, this is a bit of my life. And without doubt part of what shaped me.
Chilling and worse to contemplate any such fate for this candidate, or that nation.
Hmmm, Bushfire Bill. Was that you on the wireless? Saying:
‘I personally don’t have an opinion either for or against him. I don’t care if he’s black, white or brindled’.
Dave from Albury,
Clinton had no less of an armchair ride into the Senate than Obama.
let’s not forget that jfk started the vietnam war, presided over its expansion and began the tradition of unilateral us brinkmanship that resulted in lots of smouldering proxy wars around the world. beware the messianic politician. jfk is like benazir bhutto, someone who looks a lot better dead than alive.
when you look at obama’s positions re: iraq, israel (undying loyalty) and the middle east in general, his opinions on the role of the us, there is very little daylight between him, the other dems and the republicans. it’s one thing to talk about eventually leaving iraq one day, jfk opposed vietnam and wanted to leave before he became president and poured hundreds of thousands of troops in. it’s another thing entirely to say you’re leaving and set a date with troop numbers like rudd has done. maybe i’m wrong, and i hope i am, but i don’t think so.
‘Ullo me Lovelies! Fancy finding you mob of desperates here. And how very kind of you, William, to help us in our weakness with a “separate thread”.
Adam and Eddy, I’m very much in accord with Kirribilli Removals. Reckon you’re both dead wrong about Obama. He has the game to rise above the flak of swiftboaters and bigots.
Posted this at LP ealier today.
[Jan 8th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
“New Hampshire Weather Forecast
Unusually warm temperatures and clear skies will likely lead to record turnout in tomorrow’s New Hampshire primary.
Key finding: Clinton has regained some support among woman voters age 25 to 49 and that appears to have stopped her slide. This race still turns on age, however, with Obama leading Clinton 43% to 27% among voters age 18 to 64 (comprising 83% of the vote), while Clinton leads among voters 65 years and older 50% to 25%.
Quote of the Day
“You don’t want to be looking back five years from now and saying the American people really rose up and changed America, and I was sitting on the couch.”
– Sen. Barack Obama, quoted by NBC News, urging people in New Hampshire to vote tomorrow. ]
Francis at 9: above are excerpts from Taegan Goddard’s Political Wire. It’s worth a rung in your favorites column during this campaign.
CBet latest. There has been major movement.
President – WINNER
OBAMA, Barack 1.95
CLINTON, Hillary 3.50
MCCAIN, John 7.50
GIULIANI, Rudolph 8.00
ROMNEY, Mitt 13.00
HUCKABEE, Mike 14.00
BLOOMBERG, Michael 21.00
PAUL, Ron 26.00
EDWARDS, John 34.00
Obama has stormed into market favouritism in the last 48 hours.
Don’t wish to sound trite, but Significant History is happenin’ here.
If Obama stays alive, he’ll romp in. The guy is a vote magnet the likes of whom pop up only once every generation or two.
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/mikeluckovich;_ylt=AqJF8wMaP9YFjaidtBkaQPpU_b4F
Hey all, i have a question for you poll gurus. I am surprised to see Obama go from about even to a 10% lead in the polls in 5 days in NH. Would you ever see anything like that in Australia? The avg American is surely no more fickle than your avg Aussie punter, so why the sudden and massive swing? For what it’s worth, Go Obama!
Because Obama’s victory in Iowa victory has increased his profile and standing elsewhere, including New Hampshire. A win in the first contest generates momentum heading into the second contest and so on. That’s what makes the early states so important.
In the Australian context we might think of Mundingburra 1996 or Frankston East 1999. In both instances, the party that did better than expected at the general election went on to enjoy an important victory at a crucial subsequent content.
From LA Times today: Look out Dems,……here come the BFG’s.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-chamber8jan08,1,5346679.story?track=rss&ctrack=1&cset=true
Looks to me like McCain will struggle for relevance in this campaign. There are good reasons why he is not the class candidate some here would have us believe.
79 Megan, why not link to accessible sites?
Ok,not just Dems….any bleeding-heart candidate who thinks that winner shouldn’t take all. Cringe to see such naked greed.
Steve,sorry, thought I had. Will go forage.
Steve, new to all this so pls excuse. Hope this works.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-chamber8jan08,0,4301350.story?coll=la-home-center
And one on ‘Change’ from The Nation,where the last paragraph hits it on the head:
“Where before it seemed that thick, impenetrable gloomy clouds were rolling across the landscape, a bright and shimmering but so far empty screen has been hung. Soon, something will be projected there. Then we’ll know what this season of change–or at least of the word “change”–meant.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-chamber8jan08,0,4301350.story?coll=la-home-center
Oops…wrong one!
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080121/schell
Enuff!!
Adam it is a county where the majority praise the lord, they may be looking for a messier, not solutions. As an aside you do sound a lot like Howard attacking Rudd, now how did that work out? Of cause on the logical plane you are right.
I think the democrats will win whoever, without the religious vote ( or the economical radical vote if HUCKABEE gets up) the republicans are nothing. Unfortunately I think Obama will be elected and Edwards will end up being president, the USA have form ( and I’m not willing to be as blunt as Phillip Adams).
A mountain out of a molehill here methinks…
While this oppinion is all interesting, it nowhere near alligns to polling and/or fact. Obama is well ahead in all betting markets, and the historical analogies would suggest that the leader after Iowa and New Hampshire goes on to win nomination. If Hillary can’t beat Obama, she doesn’t deserve the nomination.
For all the talk of Obama being in charge of weapons and the military and how scared that make us…please. A president like Obama would have offers of help flowing in from all sorts of advisors and experts. He’d be no less inept than someone who went into the job with more connections and legislative experience like, say, dubya.
And finally, on the point of attacks on lack of policy substance? That is not what wins or loses elections, either here (remember Rudds lack?) or abroad. The US voted for Jnr Bush cos they thought he was a good guy (and remembered the name from somewhere), Clinton cos he was charismatic, and Reagan cos he was folksey. Obama combines what was so immensely popular in those last two.
Oh and the ‘Hussein’ bit has already had one run. It was ceremonially dumped, seen through as more Rove-like muckraking, and ignored. Americans – even Republicans it would seem – like Obama, and dislike such attacks. I have no doubt some ‘swift-boaters’ will release ads calling Obama ‘BHO’, but I think that Roveism has passed its high water mark for the moment.
…dislike such attacks on particularly popular figures…
Turnout is huge and some towns look like running out of voting papers.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/01/new-hampshire-t.html
morning firends, and Glen-
todays favourite is … (and actualluy Hillary might borrow this one)-
“I want to thank you for taking time out of your day to come and witness my hanging.”
-At the dedication of his portrait, Austin Texas, Jan 4 , 2002.
JUst had a quick perusal of formed blogs :
B Bill
I disagree with your premise that Obama is only there because he is black. The man is showing some passion and vision and as naive as that might seem to hardened political cynics (yes, I mean you Adam), it is what people are crying out for. And it’s why we elected young Kevin.
Policies, debates, slogans whatever – if there is the possibility of change (even if it is only a perception) then people are jumping at it.
Nothing could be as awful as what we’ve had with the neocons taking us to an iillegal war, f@#king the environment and alllowing insane fundamentalists to influence public policy, to name a few issues.
Hillary is part of the establishment (and therefore the old order). Obama is new, committed and winning: that’s going to surge him ahead, and hipefully get him over the line.
The argument about experience doesn’t cut it, as a lot of people don’t value the way things have been done anyway. Ask Howard.
This from the NY Times magazine on electronic voting machines, it may not matter who wins the Dem nomination if the abomination of rigged voting machines can not be overcome. Most of these machines are manufactured by Diebold, a major contributor to the Republicans in the past:
“[Voting machines] fail unpredictably, and in extremely strange ways; voters report that their choices “flip” from one candidate to another before their eyes; machines crash or begin to count backward; votes simply vanish. (In the 80-person town of Waldenburg, Ark., touch-screen machines tallied zero votes for one mayoral candidate in 2006—even though he’s pretty sure he voted for himself.) Most famously, in the November 2006 Congressional election in Sarasota, Fla., touch-screen machines recorded an 18,000-person “undervote” for a race decided by fewer than 400 votes.”
See:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/magazine/06Vote-t.html
“No Republican in the modern era has ever won the nomination without winning Iowa or New Hampshire. In this year where all bets seem to be off and something new happens every day, that trend seems like one that is destined to continue.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/politics_nation/2008/01/nh_crucial_to_mitt_mccain_1.html
Interesting that the latest poll had McCain falling away. It will be the most comical part of the campaign so far if he gets rolled today.
Glen — why the hate for Ron Paul? If I recall correctly, you’re a Liberal member, and the liberalism (US-Eng = libertarianism) he espouses is more or less what our Liberals are supposed to stand for.
I’m a Lib and if I was in the U.S. he would have all my support. Non-interference, less tax, individual rights? — I thought that was what we stood for.
Adam, I am not sure where all the hostility to Barack Obama comes from. From what i have read, he did not have an easy ride into the Senate, in fact he was a way-out outsider when he started that campaign (both in terms of getting democrat support and then beating the republican candidate).
On the issue of expierence and other bits mentioned above, it just reflects the Hillary song-book of a kitchen-sink attack on Obama:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/portrait-in-cynicism-hil_b_80289.html
From what i have heard from Hillary, all that she has said is that she has experience, but has not really actually explained why anyone should be interested in the experience she has: to what use will she put it? The only thing she has said is that she is afraid (fear campaign) that the country will go backwards, if she is not elected, which just smacks of arrogance and a sense of her being entitled to the presidency because she has done her 35 years of penance.
Hudson, the bellweather seat for New Hampshire.
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080108/NEWS01/993676243
Well interesting, people thought Kerry was riding the anti-republican wave, people thought Kerry could rise above swift boating too … how did that go?
Some of the points above are interesting. The levels of complexity in the US system make it more fun, the dems should be trying to pick who is going to have most appeal in the swing states … I should go find my list of them.
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=e2f15397-a3c7-4720-ac15-4532a7da84ca
For this interested in Dr Ron Paul
“If Romney wins today, the key symbols could be a broken-down bus versus hundreds of cell phones. Yesterday, McCain’s auxiliary press bus broke down, months after the campaign downgraded its famed Straight Talk Express because of cash shortages.
Meanwhile, the Romney campaign had rented extra office space and laid in 270 cell phones to boost phone-banking capacity. On Sunday, the campaign reached 50,000 voters with telephone calls or a knock on the door, said Jim Merrill, Romney’s state director. Yesterday and today, Romney also deployed his five sons across the state.
At a 500-strong rally in Bedford last night, Romney described some family characteristics as told in a book about his great-great-grandfather.
“There’s an old family saying that if a Romney drowns in a river, look upstream for the body,” Romney said. “So regardless of how things are we’re going to keep battling and fighting, and so regardless of how things are, you can expect us in the fight every day, every night.”
Today, Romney will dispatch 20 passenger vans for get-out-the-vote efforts, Merrill said. For his part, McCain’s campaign will have vans in each of New Hampshire’s 10 counties, said Mike Dennehy, a top McCain strategist.
If television advertisements were decisive, Romney would win by a landslide. He’s spent nearly $4 million on ads on WMUR, the only statewide television channel, according to numbers compiled by Dante Scala, an assistant professor of political science at the University of New Hampshire.
That’s nearly four times the $1.1 million spent on WMUR ads by McCain, the next biggest-spender of the Republican race.
The Romney campaign hasn’t just been pricey, it’s also been precisely targeted. All along, Romney’s campaign has zeroed on New Hampshire’s Republican base, expecting the independents who can vote in either primary to flock to the Democratic race”
http://www.concordmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080108/FRONTPAGE/801080318