I am optimistic about the election in general, no matter who the democratic nominee ultimately is. I think the rest of the country has been slow to figure out how deceitful, corrupt, incompetent the current administration is, and now that’s actually working in our favor. Remember a few years back, when we were wondering ‘what the hell is wrong with the rest of America?’
Since all the signs have worsened (to the extent that they’re hard for a sane person to deny), Americans are really seeing the writing on the wall, albeit a few years too late. My point is, I think the tide will shift even more towards democrats in general, so I think no matter who we pick, that nominee will end up winning the general election (barring some unforeseen disaster). Also, I think it’s pretty exciting that all at once we are looking at a woman and an African-American as our top choices.
I’m leaning heavily towards Obama at this point, and I doubt much would change me. As much as it sounds like election year bullshit, I really think that all the talk of ‘change’ and ‘bringing people together’ is relevant. As for ‘change’, I think we need almost ANY kind of change, and Hillary has disappointed me a number of times by voting much in line with the Washington establishment, including the republicans. Some of her statements have also fed right into the republican fear mongering bullshit that was in fashion at the time. I think that beneath it all, she is quite liberal, but that she too often follows the current political winds. Once in office, she might govern more liberally than she sometimes indicates, but still to me she represents too much of ‘the same’ at a time when we need huge change.
Hillary is also divisive. Not intentionally - I don’t mean in her speeches or her politics. I just mean that (maybe through no fault of her own) there are a lot of people who just dislike her. Obviously she is a magnet for hate from hardcore right-wingers (and it may just be because she’s a ‘Clinton’), but I also know lefties that would vote for anyone but her. And I think that more voters ‘in the middle’ or even Republicans who are disgusted with their party would be more likely to swing to Obama.
Obama has shown that he can rally young people, who have been complacent and apathetic towards voting as long as I can remember. In every election, it’s claimed that the young people will come out and make a difference ‘this time’…but on election day they disappoint every time. Obama’s first win (Iowa) was partially supported by a record number of under-30 voters, many of whom had voted for the first time. It’s also impressive how women voters have leaned towards him when it was assumed that they would flock towards Hillary.
I also think it’s telling how a candidate’s previous constituents feel about them. The obvious example being Rudy ‘Ghoul’-iani. Since 9-11, the rest of the country bought into him as ‘America’s mayor’ even though New Yorkers in general did not (and somehow nobody even remembered his pre-9-11 approval ratings). Six months ago he was the number one republican nominee, but when the rest of the country actually heard what he had to say, even the dummies saw through his 9-11 bullshit (For the same reason I think it will be very telling how Mitt Romney does in Massachusetts).
In the case of Hillary and Obama, all my lefty friends in Illinois are big fans of Obama, while my lefty friends in NY are not unanimous in their support for Hillary.
But at the end of the day, the number one issue for me is the War in Iraq, for reasons too numerous to count. Ultimately, any discussion of Foreign Policy, Domestic issues (Education or Health insurance for example), taxation or the economy still brings me back to this war. We have wasted (and continue to waste) vast sums of money that to you and I and the rest of the country are so large that the numbers have become completely abstract and meaningless.
If we had half this money back we could make huge strides towards universal health care…or education…or poverty…or infrastructure…Maybe all of the above. And this recession that we (arguably) have now entered, as far as I’m concerned, is purely a result of the long war in Iraq.
As you know, Hillary supported the war, and now is backtracking on her vote, claiming she voted for the AUMF (Authorization to Use Military Force) to scare Hussein into backing down on inspections. On the day of that vote, Obama spoke in Chicago against the war:
“I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars”
Hillary has continued to be cowered (along with most of the democrats) into continuing to fund the Bush requests for more money, when the only sure recourse congress had to stop the war was to hold back funding.
Not long ago (august) Hillary voted in favor of a resolution designating Iran’s army as a terrorist organization (the first time any national army has been designated a terrorist group). In theory, this alone could give the administration an excuse for an unprovoked attack on Iran, much as the AUMF gave them the OK to attack Iraq.
Obama would represent a clean break with our disastrous foreign policy of recent years. Both Obama and Clinton have surrounded themselves with advisors who are remnants of the Bill Clinton presidency. But many of Barack’s advisors (Richard Clarke, Lawrence Korb, Robert Malley and Samantha Power) were against this war before it happened, while Clinton’s camp includes people like Michael O’Hanlon from the Brookings institute (who as far as I can tell, is a republican masquerading as a lefty), and Richard Holbrooke, who was disastrously wrong on the Iraq war from the start.
If you look back on history, the great hero of the lefties was JFK. And, looking back on his election, what was his greatest strength? Certainly not his plans, policies, or his accomplishments. It was his leadership, his charisma, his personality. He brought America together in pride and common goals, and represented change at a time when America did not even know they wanted change.
The difference is, now America can’t stop talking about the need for change.
