It’s Finally Over!
June 3, 2008
Although Clinton has not yet conceded, it now appears that Obama is the Democratic nominee. We can all breathe a sigh relief. Of course, back before it all began, last December, some great and wise sage (hee hee) wrote the following:
“Anyway, for what it’s worth, I think it will be Obama vs. McCain, and Obama will win narrowly.”
Now let’s see if the second prediction comes true. I stand by it!
43 Comments
Comments are closed.
I’ll drink to that prediction.
What a relief. Obama is the emptiest suit to run for President in a long time.
Obama is the emptiest suit to run for President in a long time.
Oh, please. Compared to John Kerry? Forget about him?
i would take Kerry over Obama any day. I think the republicans are pleased that Obama is the “man”
His suit is fuller than McCains. Policywise, he can be quite innovative while challenging ideological orthodoxy. Look at his approach to education and teacher’s unions. Plus, we will get somebody who looks at the rest of the world thorugh the eyes of a prudent adult, not a testy adolescent boy.
Just don’t be an unborn baby, else you’re SOL with Obama. Probably the most cynical candidate in a while, who’s managed to appear idealistic and ‘new’. As soon as his old radical buddies didn’t benefit him anymore, they were dropped. Quite the stunt, that hope and change idiocy. Of course, sheeple are easy to fool, wish thinking is a powerful motivator. I despise the creep.
The prospect of a return to a sane and reality-based foreign policy is a cause for celebration.
And McCain’s flip-flops on torture, upper tax cuts, talking to enemies (including even Hamas in his case) et al. make him the Kerry of 2008.,
Other countries always like weak American presidents, so he’d definitely be popular.
If Barry makes Hillary his VP, I’d sleep with one eye open if I were him :P
Policywise, he can be quite innovative while challenging ideological orthodoxy.
I don’t think he’s implemented any policies, anywhere. I guess that’s innovative in and of itself.
It will be a tough race. NO doubt and no doubt an exciting one. I still think the Democrats would have had a better person in Hillary but oh well we shall see.
I think the republicans are pleased that Obama is the “man”
Hahaha!! I think we’re going to see some desperate Republicans in the next few months actually… Obama is a phenomenon that even Clinton couldn’t stop even though she led in money, African American vote and everything else 2:1… it’s going to be an interesting and exciting race!
“Hahaha!! I think we’re going to see some desperate Republicans in the next few months actually… Obama is a phenomenon that even Clinton couldn’t stop even though she led in money, African American vote and everything else 2:1… it’s going to be an interesting and exciting race!”
Speaking as Republicanm,we would of course have preffered a more JOhn Kerry like guy. THe Democrats had two dynamic people running. But in the end I rather have Obama running against us than Hillary. Though if Had to make the choice I would rather have Hillary running the country.
Obama still has Flaws that can be exploited and those willnot so easily go away. Only Time and experience will take care of those.
Hillary messed up very early on by some huge blunders. Including wasting money all over the place and making several huge stragetic errors early on.
It will be in the end I think partly styled by the Republicans as a campaign of style over subtance pluszeroing in on issues that have intense State and regional appeal
It will be in the end I think partly styled by the Republicans as a campaign of style over subtance pluszeroing in on issues that have intense State and regional appeal
Oh, I know exactly what Republicans are going to exploit: Barack HUSSEIN Obama and Rev. Wright!
I was happy that McCain and Obama were going to run, because the two seemed gentlemen who were going to keep the campaigns clean, but McCain is already starting the cheap attacks (e.g. with the GI bill) and we only have to wait how Obama handles it… and last night, McCain coming out as Hillary’s rescuer… come on… I really hope McCain stands by his pledge to have a clean campaign and that Obama follows accordingly, because if McCain goes negative, then Obama is going to win (same thing that happened with Hillary)
“Oh, I know exactly what Republicans are going to exploit: Barack HUSSEIN Obama and Rev. Wright!”
I suppose there shall be some of that by some conservative voices. However many Republicans and conservatives have voting blocs that have much more substantial issues and concerns that will be exploited. I think we have learned from the Republican primary that some of these groups did not have the power they imagined
I have a hard time seeing the RNC running ads that say don’t vote against Barack HUSSIEN Obama.
McCain is making a play for Hillary voters. SO what. He wants to win and in some demographics that is one friendly to him
LEt us be fair too. Many Obama partisans will be just as in the dirt and in bareknuckled as their conservative counterparts. I don’t think that will change
It was so gracious and statesman-like of McCain to give that “performance: last night, on the very historical night and precise time that the first African American captured a presidential nomination.
As though he could not wait one day. Is he tone-deaf?
Haters and chokers keep it coming. The nightmare ends in a few short months.
Mark what are you referring too? The appearance in Kenner last night? Obama gets tons of great press. I swear his acceptance speeches are the longest things I have heard and the media have give great coverage to him. Even the event was not planned to be grand as you could tell from the environment it is in.
I must say also I doubt John McCain and his staff can predict the future and knew that when that event was planned that enough SUperdelegates could have come over to Obama to where he got the numbers to be the PRESUMPTIVE nominee.
Anyway, we shall not be campaigning with a view of making sure Obama gets his significant moments.
Anyway, I think many of us news and political junkies very much overestimate how many Americans are tuning into this stuff at this point
jh,
You may be a bit naive about the timing. The primary dates and poll closing times were announced months in advance,
Even National Review Online (no bastion of Obama lovers) said this:
McCain’s Speech [Amy Holmes]
McCain’s speech was creaky, ungracious, and unnecessary. I never understand why politicians don’t take the opportunity, when so easily presented, to simply be gracious and hold their fire. Watching McCain, I couldn’t help but think of the astonishing contrast Barack’s triumphant speech to a massive and adoring crowd will be. It was not a comparison McCain should have invited.
It would have been more statesmanlike ‹ precisely the profile McCain is attempting to craft ‹ to acknowledge this historic moment in American politics. A major party is on the cusp of selecting an African American to be their nominee for President of the United States. It’s a tribute to America that we’ve come this far. It would have been magnanimous to leave it at that, and wait until tomorrow to declare with enthusiasm and relish, “It’s on!”
Mark, the giving of the speech was planned when it was not known he would have the required superdelgates in the can!! If McCain had this vision then he was very well not served by his staff because the location is horrible and I can think of many more dramatic locations than a hall in the burbs of New Orleans.
As to Mrs Holmes where she can have her view. McCain has big nights where he shared the stage and Obama is going after and asking Republicans to come on over
THe Kenner event was in the planning stages before the Credential committee for the DNC Convention had even met. Could he have noted it. Well I suppose he could. However McCain has showed class numerious times and in fact spoken out against what he thought were attacks on Obama that were beyond the pale. I have learned this year from the whole Romney/Huckabee saga that such things are quickly forgotten.
jh,
But did the speech have to be that type of speech, once the significance of the night became clear?
Mark , Well guess he could have changed it up. I suppose it did not hit me as impolite because that did not seem to be the entirety of his speech. As to the significance of the night well is it really? I mean the media drives and proclaims things as significant.
The fact is Hillary has not conceded. I mean is anyone going to recall 10 years from now where they were when Obama won South Dakota for goodness sake.
Obama huge and indeed signifcant night is the day he accepts the nomination of the Democratic party. The same night he gives it will be the same night that Dr Martin Luther King gave his famous I have a Dream Speech. There will be so much buzz over the connection it will be talked about for weeks before and a two weeks after. That will be the signifcant moment for Obama.
I am pretty sure that per history that the other Presidential Nominee from the other party will not try to upstage their opponent on their night
jh,
I am sure too, as Mr. McCain is characteristically a gracious man.
Let’s hope that this election can be about the real policy and fundamental differences between the candidates. Our times are too crisis-laden for anything otherwise.
Given that Obama had a number of digs at McCain (some of them moderately unfair) in his speech, I’m not sure why it would necessarily be inappropraite for McCain to give a speech hitting Obama on the same night.
Obama is not at all above “going negative” and using distortions to make his opponent look bad (like insisting repeatedly that McCain “wants to wage war for a hundred years” when that’s clearly not what McCain’s comment meant.) It’s just the Obama’s supporters don’t consider attacks on McCain to be “negative” or consist of “division”.
Of course there’s going to be division, folks. It’s a zero sum game. Obama can only win by making McCain lose. Each voter votes for one candidate and not the other. For all people who, if Obama is elected, believe that the long night is over and they can be happy for the first time in eight years, there will be almost as many people who feel they have been kicked out into the night, and will be disgusted by many of the things that Obama would do as president.
I certainly HOPE that Obama “goes negative” about McCain and the Republican Party, because that’s the only way he can win; there’s a great, great deal to “go negative” about. McCain may not want to “wage war” for “one hundred years,” but he certainly DOES want to occupy Iraq for as many years, to use her as a military base for an indefinite period into the future–all things that the religious leaders of the Shiah Muslim community cannot and WILL NOT tolerate. If the election is to be about “issues,” then “going negative” about Republican positions is Barack Obama’s DUTY to his party and to his country. I predict that he will do so, but in a fashion that is dignified and respectful of individuals.
Given that Obama had a number of digs at McCain (some of them moderately unfair) in his speech, I’m not sure why it would necessarily be inappropraite for McCain to give a speech hitting Obama on the same night.
There is that whole “turn the other cheek” thing…
Mr. McCain’s biggest criticism over Obama has been over the latter’s supposed naivete in the latter’s willingness to talk to Iran.
But just which McCain is McCain?
Did not Mr. McCain himself just three years ago advocate diplomacy with Hamas?
From Huffington Post. 5/15
Two years ago, in an interview with James Rubin for Sky News, Sen. John McCain expressed a willingness to negotiate with the terrorist group Hamas — the very group that McCain has been relentlessly using to smear Sen. Barack Obama over the last several weeks.
Rubin has written an op-ed in Friday’s Washington Post about his exchange with McCain, and The Huffington Post has obtained exclusive video. Here’s the key excerpt:
RUBIN: “Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?”
McCAIN: “They’re the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it’s a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that.”
Digby,
And it is precisely because some of us honestly believe that Obama would do inestimably more harm to the people of the US and of Iraq and other countries that we want to see McCain be sharp in his criticisms of Obama.
Mark,
Perhaps we read different news outlets, but it seems to me that McCain has also cricized Obama a good deal on spending, pulling out of Iraq precipitously, the farm bill, taxes and a number of other issues. Sure, there are certain “gotcha” issues that the cable channels like to focus on because they are easily covered in 30 seconds — but the solution to that is simply not to get cable.
That said, there’s a very, very big difference between saying that the US will need to engage diplomatically with Hamas in order to trying to bring it back from the brink, and suggesting that the president should meet personally and without preconditions with the leaders of rogue regimes. The foolishness of Obama’s original off-the-cuff answer is pretty well underlined by the extent to which he has since “clarified” his position.
What McCain said was that the U.S. should have diplomatic relations with Hamas if they renounced violence and agreed to recognize Israel. Full video and transcript available here.
DC,
McCain has been the one playing loudly gotcha politics on the issue over the past few months, also contradicting his own former positions (in regards to Hamas) and that of Secretary Gates recently (in regards to Iran).
The fact is, the next president will inherent the disaster of Bush/Cheney’s utter lack of failures in diplomacy for 6-7 years.
lack of/failures in…
Not only that, but McCain has made clear his desire to FURTHER isolate the U.S., with his recent machisimo in regards to Russia and his well documented intention to invade Iran. The consequences of this would be disastrous for all.
BA,
How would McCain get Hamas from point A to B without some type of diplomacy?
Mark,
Who is playing gotcha probably depends on what you mind. I very much doubt that if one did a tally one would find that McCain has needled Obama over Iran more than Obama has claimed that McCain wants a 100 or 1000 year war. But you don’t mind the latter, so you don’t notice it as much.
Blackadder,
Good fact check.
Since people are making predictions, here’s mine:
If Obama is elected, we will see Iran back either a complete disintegration of civil authority in Iraq, or a coup by Shiite factions. The US will pull out quickly, and a couple hundred thousand more Iraqis will die in the unrest, but American liberals will happily claim that’s Bush’s fault.
Iran will announce that it has nuclear warheads and the missiles to deliver them to Israel, but will not actually use them.
We will get involved in some sort of “peace keeping” morass in a failed nation, probably in Africa, and lose a couple hundred troops while completely failing to make things better for the people we’re allegedly there to protect.
Obama will push through a national health care plan which he will label a success, but will actually be much scaled back and largely optional — costing much and pleasing no one. None the less, he will serve a second term.
If McCain is elected:
Iraq will gradually stablize and most US troops will be back home within four years.
Iran will develop nuclear warheads but not tell anyone about it, resulting in an uneasy but quiet Middle East.
A veto-proof Democratic majority in congress will let most of the Bush tax cuts expire and push through increased spending despite furious vetoes and denunciations of earmarks from McCain. The deficit will continue to swell as a result, and Democrats will successfully pin that on McCain in order to defeat him in an election focused on domestic issues in 2012.
Mark,
I have not seen McCain well documented intention to invade Iran in the PRess. or in his statement.
History is still out on the Bush/Cheney Diplomacy. I do see in the Middle East that AQ and others are now hated by the arab street. I also see we might be on the cusp of something significant and long term ion Iraq.
6 years ago Bin Laden was regarded as a Hero among amny people in Jordan. That day has long passed
Again people perceptions of the facts will differ and that of course will influence their choices.
Mark,
For starters, by saying that until they do so they won’t be getting any money from the U.S., nor the legitimacy that comes through normal diplomatic ties.
Obama’s saying that he would meet personally and without preconditions with the likes of Ahmadinejad and Kim Jong Il was just plain dumb. Even he seems to have realized as much.
Someone tell me – Why exactly does it matter that Obama is black? Should that really have any weight on his capability to be President? I don’t look at it as a disadvantage, and would happily vote for whoever is qualified whatever their color.
But why should it have any positive spin at all
Mark
Read today’s speech by Obama on the Middle East and to AIPAC the Jewish lobby.
It is long and far from pacifistic in spirit. I was very surprised in his wanting a stronger committment to Afghanistan and he called Iran the greatest threat in that area and McCain is going to fail miserably in any debates if he paints Obama as quiescent or pacifist on Iran or terrorism. Obama also called for Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel.
I sat there wondering how many Obama supporters were stunned this morning in this area of armed forces related issues that he was addressing. Was this all new to them.
“I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.”
The world’s new savior, Obama!
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23812517-661,00.html
Again, no thanks.
Bill Bannon,
It was not new to me. I have been familiar with his real foreign policy proposals for quite awhile
I avoid the mental laziness of dismissing Obama as as empty suit or a messiah figure.
It is sad that those who are enrolled in some of nation’s greatest institutions of higher learning bask in the mental drivvel of the likes of M. Malkin, Rusk Limbaugh et al.
Bill as to Afganhistan that is nothing new. In fact that has laregly been a Democrat talking point since the discussion of the surge and funding of the war last year.
Obama has been on that page.
Now the fact of why Afghanistan is good and Iraq bad and the fact that I suspect people have no idea of the dynamoics there since it is never reported is another issue
“I have not seen McCain well documented intention to invade Iran in the Press or in his statements”
jh:
Search You Tube for the phrase “Bomb, bomb, bomb . . . bomb, bomb Iran”. You will find Mr. McCain giving a statement and although it looks like one of his SNL perfomances this one is not meant to be satirical. It’s wonderful how he takes the issue of war and human life lost through bombing sooo seriously. But then I guess you become numb to those sorts of things after spending the early part of your life bombing “gooks” from 50,000 feet.
jpf
McCain will not invade Iran unless he has too.
Let me tell you about JOhn McCain. McCain despite being tortured and going through hell led the charge to noramalize relations with Vietnam. It is again one of those issues where he reached accross the aisle. You know the thing Obama says he always will do. McCain took a lot of heat on a emotional issue. Everything was involved including the POW issue that was hot.
That shows a ton of about McCain and if the gook comment is all you got against that well I guess I will stand by my man then.
It is truly amazing when McCain get lauded for standing up on these issues in the past how quickly it is forgotten
Again, he also very recently flip-flopped on the torture issue, in a cover for the Bush administration.
And it is precisely because some of us honestly believe that Obama would do inestimably more harm to the people of the US and of Iraq and other countries that we want to see McCain be sharp in his criticisms of Obama.
I’m sure you honestly believe that. Unfortunately, your honest belief is founded on foolishness. On the other hand, a fair number of people believe, based on a clear reading of the last seven years, that electing any Republican will continue to harm the the people of the world. Voting Republican, at least as the Republican Party exists now, is an act of moral depravity.