Entries from January 1, 2008 - February 1, 2008
John Edwards is Dropping Out
Ferentz
in Politics, Presidential Campaign
|
Post a Comment
2G2K Circus: Leaders of the New School
Jeff, that's an interesting question. Either contense will be incredibly intense, but for different reasons. A McCain versus Clinton contest threatens to draw out the nastier elements of both parties, and consequently lead to each candidate only giving lip-service to issues pertaining to people of color. Clinton would have to present herself as more hawkish to compete with McCain, who while he's a hawk, he's not one in the mold of Cheney/Rumsfeld, so this could lead to some nasty exchanges that do not benefit either candidate. This would also be a campaign where both candidates run on their records and not necessarily their visions, and that won't benefit Americans as a whole.
On the other hand, a McCain versus Obama campaign would be so ideologically heated that it could lead to some serious shifts in American politics-especially if McCain takes Obama's cue and draws Republicans more toward the middle. Obama will force McCain to articulate a vision for this country, and it would be interesting to see what he comes up with, because it will show voters who he really is and how much he's willing to concede in order to be president. He can either go far right or drift toward the center and force republicans to do right by this country. My chief concern is that neither of these two are great debaters-and their mannerisms when on screen could color voters opinions in unflattering ways.
What do other folks think?
Also, what are the possible ramifications of Edward's concession?
Ferentz
in Current Affairs, Politics, Presidential Campaign, Barack Obama, Jeff Chang, 2G2K Circus
|
Post a Comment
|
1 Reference
Erykah Badu's New Video Honey
Let the 70s babies trip down memory lane begin...
2G2K Circus: You Need More People
Jeff started us off with this question:
On a different topic, The Times and some commenters have noted that there's a huge enthusiasm gap with the Reep race this year. Nevada alone turned out over 10x as many Dems to the caucuses this year as they did in 2004, and 3x as many as Reeps. How do you think this translates to the general election?
That's a tricky question because it will be interesting to see whether democrats can sustain this level of engagement going into the general election. I get the sense that there will be a significant drop off if either Obama or Clinton are not the nominees, with the bigger margin coming if Obama does not get the nod. This should not be read as an indictment of Clinton, but so many people would pick her to win that frustrated Obama, Edwards, and Kucinich voters might accipurposefully neglect to vote. We saw a little of bit this with Kerry's campaign in 2004. People get excited about a primary and all kinds of get out the vote campaigns emerge, but these campaigns and the drawn out elections they undergird, eventually become less pressing for most americans.
Additionally, democrats are going to have to figure out how to maneuver through Michigan and Florida after not participating in primaries in those two states. This Michigan and Florida story has been somewhat underreported, and it can prove more important to democrat hopes than we think because not only are they both rich in delegates, but they also stretch a candidate's diversity. In Michigan you have to appeal to laid off factory workers, college professors, students, etc., and ethnic diversity is at times negligible. Florida on the other hand has strong Cuban and senior citizen voting blocks that are not always in concert with each other. It also has less visible voting blocks from Haitian, Jamaican and South American countries who democrats have to engage.
The Republican candidate might have an advantage at least in terms of infrastructure in these two states, and in a close race, such an advantage is too slight to overlook.
What do you thinK?
Ferentz
EatMYShorts, you are right with the McCarthy allusion, New Hampshire tears notwithstanding.
Mahalia, Jeff suggests otherwise in his reply. But, I am liable to agree with you on this one. Unlike 2004, Obama has remained competitive longer than either Dean or Edwards, therefore his followers are making a greater investment. Once you add that Edwards has also committed to staying in for the long run, it suggests that it might be harder for Dems to close ranks than previously imagine. Also unlike in 2004 where Kerry benefited greatly from people obsessed with getting Bush out of office, people will feel compelled to vote more on principles than passions, what passioned principles mean going into this election are not entirely clear. Without a menace like Bush in office, it is hard to predict how moderates will vote, or whether they will even vote until we see how the two candidates present themselves in a general election. If his campaign tactics against Mitt Romney are any indication, McCain is not afraid to level impolite barbs at his opponent, and we already know how die-hard republicans hate the Clintons, so a Clinton McCain contest surely has the potential to be a nasty one. McCain's bread and butter when things get dirty, and which most media outlets are more than happy to back up, is that he's a war hero. Having such a wild card in his political back pocket allows McCain to be the endearing Maverick that so many people love, and we have already seen how Clinton deals with such an opponent.
Ferentz
in Current Affairs, Politics, Presidential Campaign, 2G2K Circus
|
2 Comments
|
2 References
Focus The Nation at The New School
Ferentz
in Current Affairs, Community Events
|
Post a Comment