Wednesday, February 06, 2008

USA election 2008 candidates are...

...still unknown in both parties. And this after the main primaries (super duper Tuesday per Obama).

At 1:17 am ET (Wednesday)

Barack wins 13 states, Clinton 8 and New Mexico ( delayed results due to bad weather and having run out of ballots earlier) not yet called.

MSNBC dares to guesstimate (through careful calculation) the number of democratic delegates. Projects 841 for Obama and 837 for Clinton.

Jeez! They didn't see that one coming. I'd pay money to hear the private conversations in the Clinton camps.

Frankly, even Obama isn't quite sure he isn't dreaming.

But that's the beauty of the audacity of hope, I guess.

GOP?

Romney mouthed and mouthed about the 'real conservative' only to be so badly thrown off course by the 'unreal' ones; McCain and worse, Huckabee whom the media had convinced us to totally dismiss. Well... not so fast, says he. And the results indicate that I need to stop and listen.

California is right now a rather disappointing loss for Obama. Not in losing there (as this was expected) but in the current percentages. However, only 17% is in as I type this and LA is not yet in so these stats could improve. Recall some stations had called Missouri for Clinton and had to retract as Obama just won that state by about 1% margin? if that ain't close, dunno what is.

The way I see it?

The republicans should do themeselves a favor and let McCain run as the GOP candidate. Obviously, Bush has turned Republicans off absolute conservative. Those left are the so called bible thumpers who pretty much think elections are solely about abortion and gay marriage, period. That's mostly senior citizens and Utah residents. OK. That was unnecessary.

McCain's running mate? Last year, long before I subscribed to Obama's campaign and got to know him; when I had (rushedly) assigned him the position of running mate to Clinton, I assigned Rudy Giuliani running mate to McCain. I still think this remains the best bet for the GOP.

Why? The independent vote. McCain votes with his brain, and votes against his party afflictions when common sense calls for it. Rudy dares to vote pro choice amongst other non conservative views as well. Both these candidates will face absolute disdain and contempt from within their party. However, they will be the best bet for republicans in an environment that really doesn't want a conservative leader any longer. Rght now, independents are all leaning towards Obama. This is likely to continue to be the case but any attempt to sway some of them into republican territory can only best be achieved with Rudy and John (yeah, first names. After all these late nights we've gotta be buddies by now).

I'm torn between enjoying the fierce battle between Obama and Clinton for another several months and just picking a candidate and concentrating efforts on beating the republicans. Who as we can all imagine are about to get as dirty as is possible. I'll bet you they are the ones looking for Obama's relatives in Kenya. And trust me, the skirmishes in Kenya, Odinga's claims to his kinship... all these are highly likely to surface should Obama become the leading man. Why? Because Republicans play dirty and Obama is the greatest threat they've had since Saddam. So, expect this and more(I wish I could bet $$ on this. I might be able to retire early).

Point being we need to get to hear the Republicans and their dirty politics early so that we can work with time on our side to both clear the air and to let time do what it does best, which is irritate those who have to keep listening to negativity via their expensive plasma hi def screens (Peeps don't spend that kind of money on gadgets to listen to crap through them). Plus we need to get into the Bush files and kill the republicans based on the past 7 years (very easy task). Basically, let's get to work which is let's get to winning in November 2008.

The speeches? Clinton's was jolly and celebratory and actually kinda giood. Grade it B+. Obama's was repetitive and definitely courted the remaining primary states. But not the same Obama who sweeps us off our feet when he speaks. So I'll give him a B (how else is he going to pull up his socks?) From GOP, Huckabees was as expected, excited and very hopeful and common sensical. That man is worth at least 2 cents, mormon or not. Don't recall hearing speeches from the other significant 2 (Paul is still in the race).

It felt really good to ignore Kenya and it's painful news at least for a day.

4 comments:

Stella said...

Agree with you on just about everything except for the grade you gave Obama's speech (B). How good was it? I found myself repeating "yes we can" along with everybody else as I was watching it. May be the same ol' speech but he knows how to deliver his lines.

I was probably influenced because it came minutes after John McCain began giving his speech which was just pathetic! Why republicans would want a guy who - literally & figuratively - has one foot in the grave is beyond me.

Just a heads up but Mike Huckabee is not a mormon (Mitt Romney is & I'd hate to imagine that's who you were referring to when you said he's hopeful & common sensical). I enjoy listening to Huckabee talk almost as much as I do Obama. Seems like a nice all around guy. Too bad he's batting for the enemy.

Mimmz said...

Ahhh Stella. I can see how my mormon comment got confusing. I was just I guess swiping at Romney because he was going on and on about conservatives vs not so much yet he had been attacked for being a mormom when he first started campaigning, by the same group. And recall he kept loudly suggesting that Huckabee, the non mormon, step aside so he could get his voters... yeah, that was what I was trying to jibe at but reading it now, I can see how it fell flat...

And teh common sensical part was definitely for Huckabee! That m an makes sense often enough...

Thomas said...

My interest in the race ended with the exit of John Edwards. John Edwards was the next best thing after Kucinich left. Now we are left with establishment candidates who both believe in the supremacy of the United States over international law.

Anonymous said...

Do you know Obama?

Do you know what Obama stands for?

Do you trust any presidential candidates that can make promises, and do they ever deliver those promises?

Look into the past, it is rare that they keep a promise (they always say they are working towards those goals, but does it ever happen?)

The United States has over 3 billion people, many lower class and many colored (and many without white skin), do you think he is using this to his personal advantage to become the most important man in the USA, and world, with perhaps more power than Adolph Hitler had?

Also think about his experience. He was a relative unknown less than four years ago.

Who are you voting for?

Someone with possible hope and change in todays society (no consideration about the world as a whole).

Things look bad all over the world, not just in your back yard (in “America”).

What about climate change? Has it affected your neighbourhood yet? Or just my neighbourhood? And the world?
Quote: (air pollution resulting in acid rain in both the US and Canada; the US is the largest single emitter of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels; water pollution from runoff of pesticides and fertilizers; limited natural fresh water resources in much of the western part of the country require careful management; desertification )
Quote: (Environment - party to: Air Pollution, Air Pollution-Nitrogen Oxides, Antarctic-Environmental Protocol, Antarctic-Marine Living Resources, Antarctic Seals, Antarctic Treaty, Climate Change, Desertification, Endangered Species, Environmental Modification, Marine Dumping, Marine Life Conservation, Ozone Layer Protection, Ship Pollution, Tropical Timber 83, Tropical Timber 94, Wetlands, Whaling)

Obama has a bad attitude to clean the air for future generations.

Or are you only concerned with your own lifetime?

The other candidate at least has some experience.

Who wears the pants in the White House.

Consider your decision carefully.

Bush had a similar outlook and look where we are today!

Better or worse?

You decide…