A rebuttal regarding Obama

[The original comment I took exception to:]

C - "I too want our president to suceed.
The national pride we all should share in a color blind election where the most capable and competent person just happens to be black or a woman... is the epitomy of democracy.
And no, McCain was not that person. Maybe no republican could have been this year.
No it was Hillary's year but race and style trumped ability and everyone-even the fanatical gleam in the eye white hypocrites whose lack of self awarness to this fact does not excuse the reprehensible origins of their loyalty to Hussien-knows this and that's what makes it inexcusable."

[My comment in response]

E - What a load of hooey.

 

McCain would have beaten Hillary.  It was never her year as it will never be.  She would have won the Dem nomination, but she had too many people who hated her to win.  Males would have left the Dems, even after all this, in droves.  McCain would have never nominated a fluff like Palin and would have taken the White House.  You want to trivialize Obama's win or write it off with trite explanations, but it was simple: Best man for the job.  He was inspirational when the nation needed to be inspired, charismatic and an obviously driven leader when we were tired of what the ass in the Oval Office was trying to sell us.  He is intelligent and educated, and we wanted that after finding out Texas hokum doesn't work when running anything larger than a BBQ.  And while the problems we face seem like it would condemn an inexperienced man to failure in the election, America didn't want a 30 year Senator who helped get us where we are or a close connection to the past administration, tainted and full of scandal that it was.  He lost votes because he was black (as is evidenced by Dem areas in the south that voted for McCain) but won because he was young, intelligent, hard working, well spoken, committed, and basically the anti-Bush.  

 

Will he do as well as everyone hopes?  How could he possibly?  Will some of his plans be disliked?  Sure, as no one is ever pleased by everything.  What I may like, you may dislike (and vice versa).  But I think he has earned the right - through his own well run campaign and hard work as well as through the failures of the past administration - to give it a shot and have the support of the people.

 

The simple fact so many people now have hope in this country should tell you something about his ability to inspire and how desperate the populace is for the country to go in a different direction in many areas.  And his ability to inspire and bring 'hope' back to the people will do more for this troubled economy than any program he initiates or vetoes.

The Caucus System and Delegates

Below is an excerpt from an e-mail debate:

BA - Do anyone of you believe in the party system?
EE - Yes. It has its flaws but I do think it works better than any others. I think the partys do need to change though, to become the COnservative and Liberal Parties rather than cloak them behind Democrat and Republican labels.

BA - Do you actually know what the dem or rep platform is?

If you say yes then tell me how how they don't put it together until the convention
EE - The problem is that the party should let the nominee set the platform as he/she is who the public wants. Instead the party sets the platform and supposedly the nominee is to work for that goal.


BA - No one has the balls to rock the system. The party system should be over same with the electoral college.
EE - Again, it has its flaws but has worked better than any other. It needs some changes, but I do not think it should be tossed. As far as the electoral college, I think the whole country should have primaries on the same day. The system where a candidate gets knocked out because he didn't do well in Utah and New Hampshire when they might win in Ohio and Pennsylvania is ridiculous. Barring that, we need a system where delegates vote on the public behalf. For example: Joe, Jim, and Fred are running for office and Fred and Jim are very, very similar in views. Joe is very different. Joe wins 40% of the vote. Jim wins 39% of the vote, and Fred wins only 21%. If all votes go to the winner of the state, 60% are unhappy. If Fred drops out and it comes to a fight, his delegates should be able to support Jim. We need a system that addresses that... one where you are locked in for your candidate as long as they are in, but can switch if they drop out or are voted out.

Just one man's opinion.
K - You are not alone my good man.

Just As Bill Did , So Does Ted...

Well, Bill got actively involved with Hillary's campaign and seems to have derailed it, helping her finish well behind Obama in South Carolina.

So now Ted Kennedy, who normally stays neutral in the primaries, comes out in favor of Obama... There's obviously more to that story then we will ever hear.  Whether he dislikes Hillary or Bill, it is a public slap in the face to the Senator from NY that he will have to work with (whether in the White House or Senate).  

The questions are, a) while the endorsement helps Obama with the Far Left, did Obama really need any endorsement to get the most Liberal voters?  And b), for those of us who are considering him who are not on the Far Left, does an endorsement from Teddy K. help or hurt?

It was good while it lasted...

Well, this might completely derail the Obama campaign...  Think Hillary paid Kerry to do this?

-EE

John Kerry To Endorse Obama

The 2004 Democratic presidential nominee is expected to announce his endorsement of Obama during a rally today at the College of Charleston in South Carolina.