Will Veepstakes become weepstakes for Clinton supporters at the Dem Convention?
If you did not catch the complete all-night news cycle on CNN leading up the choice for VP you know Heloise watched all for you. …
"A sinister cabal of superior writers."
.jpg?t=20120527181101)
Article comments
26 - Baritone
They all suck, and they're all ours. Nobody to blame but...
B
27 - Condor
Well,
Biden definately has more experience than Hillary. Biden doesn't have the "Al-bill-tross dangling from around his neck... there's 2 pluses. Can actually talk a good speech, not yell one, in a monotone fit for a virago.
Likeable. Sure.
Rooted. Doesn't seem to be frantically grasping.
Commutes 1.5 hours per day via rail to captial hill from his digs in Deleware (cool).
He's only 62 (maybe 64)... do you call that old? If so, check that age discrimination at the door. 60 is the new 40. At least that is what I've read in the recent past.
Okay, I'm not a big dem or rep supporter, but this is workable. Let's see what McCain has got.... short of another Admiral Stockdale.....
28 - Zedd
Clav,
Touche' re: "you missed it".
However I will repeat it. You missed my point.
I was saying that the at what time would the Dems ever be able to put a Black guy as THE Democratic nominee? Bush's gaffs and goof have created the current environment. Had a Obama not had the early FLUKE momentum that he did and Hillary not been running, Biden would have done well and would have cleaned Mccain's clock. A traditional candidate would have easily beaten McCain because of Bush's legacy. Although Edward's scandal would have killed him.
The fact that Obama is Black (sorta), young and inexperienced, but is where he is, says the Republicans are in trouble. If THAT guy (an easily unelectable person) can get where he is, what does that say about the sentiment about the GOP? Lets agree the biggest deterrent to many that Obama has is that he is Black. But even with that worrisome skin of his (chuckle) he is holding his own.
If McCain were President right now, Obama would have had a snow balls chance of being President. Hillary would have had a hard time shaking of her old image. We would have been focusing on the war in AFGANISTAN and not wanting to rock the boat by installing a newbie, let alone a bleeding heart.
29 - Clavos
Mmmm, I'm not so sure, Zedd.
Obama creamed Hillary. THE Hillary, wife of Bill; and at a time when the country is RIPE for a REALLY new kind of candidate: a woman, OR a Black man, and Obama kicked her ass!
So what's going on now?? I don't think the near dead heat is so much a sign of the Republicans being in trouble as it is that Obama is in trouble, and honestly, I think it's because of his moves to the right during the primary season.
I agree, there's a certain group who will never vote for him because he's black, and ironically, they are probably mostly Democrats -- the poor, blue collar whites, becuase that's where racism still simmers the most, and most people in that group are traditionally Dems. The thing is though, they had those attitudes a few months ago, when Obama was kickin' ass -- that demographic hasn't shifted.
No, I think he's scaring the bejesus out of the left wing of the party because he suddenly began to talk like a Republican (well, almost) a couple of months back. The centrists no longer see much difference between him and McCain, and are now looking at his lack of experience and certain parts of his background (Wright, Daley, Ayers, etc.) more closely.
It will be interesting to see if Biden helps him. There are a lot of reasons pro and con.
30 - Zedd
Perhaps.
However, you are overlooking that Hillary was HATED! She represented everything that was "evil" about Democrats to those that are not Dems. Without Bush, she wouldn't have dared run. The Clinton's banked on the fact that Bush is so disliked that ANYONE with some sort of popularity and message could win.
Dems put out the candidates that they wouldn't have dared put out at any other time under normal circumstances. They risked a sure landslide and put Obama and Hillary as candidates instead, knowing, it's now or never.
Lets be honest. Four years ago if I would have commented on a Black guy becoming Prez you would have marked me mad.
You are right that both parties are poor and we deserve far better. I do think we have a gem in Obama in that he is a thinker and is pragmatic. I value those qualities. I'm not sure if he'll make a good Prez though. I don't know if he knows how deal with situations where his charm and charisma don't affect the outcome. Now sure what type of manager he is.
Bush is great in a party atmosphere or when things are hyped up but is horrible when its time to hunker down and detail things out, he seems to get distracted and board then hypes things up in order to find meaning. I hope Obama won't complicate things in order to solve them so his talents shine so he can tell the world about it. I hope he wont be so hooked to the celebrity.
It's virtually impossible to test the Reps "racistness" in this matter. They tend to have a distant benevolence towards the minorities (snicker). Like how you are nice to your maid. Condi and Powell were fine as long as they didn't talk about race. They both knew/know this. Race matters as we know. Being that Reps don't acknowledge that race does matter in America it's sorta impossible to deal with race matters in that party AND to make an assessment as to who is racist.
Side note: I watched the National Black Rep convention on CSPAN. They were terribly unattractive. Wow!! I don't know if the reject factor had a role in that phenomenon but wow!
31 - Clavos
She represented everything that was "evil" about Democrats to those that are not Dems.
True, but when I said Obama kicked her butt, I of course was talking about the primary, in which Dems were (not Republicans, except in TX) the only ones voting for her (or him).
32 - Lisa Solod Warren
Clavos, You don't really expect anyone to buy your argument that most blue collar racists are Democrats, do you? I want proof. Really. What an amazing thing to say. When most blacks in this country vote for Democrats, when the Republicans are trying their damndest to bring blacks into their party.....blue collar Dems are the racists? I think there are racists in the Democratic party but far more in the Republicans party and sorry, but I don't buy that blue collar whites are mostly Dems. The ones I know are die hard Republicans.... God, country and John McCain.
Give me stats.
As for Obama be unelectable.... well, we shall see. I, for one, am proud of a party that takes a black candidate (and a woman, for that matter) seriously and votes for him/her as thought it were a "normal" thing. Isn't anyone else tired of old white guys running the country and, lately, running it into the ground? New blood, even if it has an oldish blood running mate, needs to be given a chance to try something new for a change. Obviously, very obviously, the old ways are NOT working. Things fall apart. Faster and faster.
33 - Clavos
Lisa,
Notice I said poor blue collar. How many poor people are Republican? Come on. Why do you think (as you correctly state) that most blacks vote Democrat? People vote their best self interest; since when have the Republicans looked out for the poor?
I didn't say there weren't racists in the Republican party; I'm sure there are, but they're not poor, though there may be a few who are blue collar, but overall, few blue collar people are attracted by the Republican party.
You're the challenger, so do your own homework and find the stats if you want, but here are two articles in the MSM that back me up.
Washington Times.
MSNBC
In any case, I didn't make this up out of whole cloth; the Democratic Party has long been the party of the working class and of minorities; anybody who knows American politics knows that.
As to Obama's "unelectability:" I didn't say that; what I (correctly) said is that the race is, at this point, a statistical dead heat, and that it's Obama's own fault that it is. By rights, after 8 years of a president with the lowest approval record ever, the Dems should be walking away with the election, and Obama is not.
34 - Lisa Solod Warren
Statistically, a dead heat perhaps. Electoral votes say otherwise. I say it's too soon to tell. I am dismayed as anyone that McCain's attack ads and falsehoods seem to be resonating with an ignorant public. I hope people read today's NYT magazine cover story, but I know the people who need to (who say they don't know what Obama stands for economically) won't. It IS a shame that Obama isn't running farther ahead. IS it racism? I don't know. Hate to think so. Perhaps you are right and it is.
35 - Dan Miller
Lisa,
Isn't anyone else tired of old white guys running the country . . . ?
Please correct me if I am placing an incorrect interpretation on this observation (which I have often heard), but it strikes me as excessively stereotypical and perverse to disparage the class of "old white guys" as though they were fungible and universally undesirable. It would be no more and no less so to disparage "young Black gals" in similar fashion.
True, as people become older some of them become senile or otherwise incapacitated. Eventually, we all do. It is also true that in many cases the aging process is accompanied by increased life experience and wisdom. True, some White folks are racist, but so are some Black folks. I doubt that the percentage of racists is much different. As to guys and gals, I haven't noticed any distinguishing gender-based characteristics in either. Some of both genders have been pretty good leaders and some have been pretty rotten.
So what was your point? Shouldn't we look at the character, intelligence, ideology, experience, political savvy, and all round competence of our candidates rather than at their physical characteristics, such as age, race and sex? It may be far easier to apply what I consider irrelevant labels, or to focus on a single issue, but that does not make it productive to do so.
Dan
36 - Franco
Well said Mr. Miller.
37 - Arch Conservative
It's always the liberals/leftists that bring up race when they begin to lose an argument of the issues. They are the first to bring up race and then claim that anyone who disagrees with them is a racist who bases all of their views on their racism. They use this attitude to reinforce the double standard in America that says if you have you're a partiulcar skin color (non-white) or of a particular political philosophy (liberal) you're allowed to have an opinion on issues involving race but if you're white and a non-liberal you're not because you;re a racist and all of your views on such issues are rooted in racism.
I think most Americans are tired of this of this bullshit though. At one of his campaign rallied Obama, exhbiting the "hey I'm black so I can say anything I want about race" atttitude said "did I mention he's black?" Basically he implied that the GOP, it's base and anyone else that opposed him were only doing so because they are racist.
Obviously this blatant, offensive racial demagogry pissed off a lot of people. McCain saw a chance to hit Obama and took it. After that Senator Obama hasn't quite thought it wise to repeat this type of stunt. I wonder why.
38 - bliffle
Archie,
Do you realize how blatantly racist your comment appears?
When you say phrases such as: "It's always the liberals/leftists ..." you're stating the essential premise for racism, namely, that these people over there are ALWAYS doing this bad thing.
If you used a term like "sometimes" ,or even "often" your assertion might be given serious consideration. But as it is the serious reader will immediately skip the remainder of your comment. Why? Because you are attempting a transparent trick to ascribe a fatal and intrinsic flaw to this group of people of which they are personally incapable of ridding themselves. As if they were irreversibly tainted with dark skin or 'jewishness' or 'liberalness'.
Thereafter, anything they do is tainted by their curse.
Racism.
39 - Dan Miller
Bliffle,
We agree (your comment #38), at least in part. Question, though: how if at all does this differ from saying that one is tired of having "old white guys" in office? See my comment #35. That seems not only racist, but sexist and "ageist" as well. Those attributes seem, to me, to be not very different.
Dan
40 - Zedd
Clav,
You forgot about the Southern Dems that moved with Reagan. You forgot about the Bubba vote. Those people moved mainly because of race politics. We may dress it up any way we want but Republicans used race to bait them to their party. The Reps wrongly demonized Blacks in late 70's and 1980's in order to vamp up Republican membership and solidarity. By doing so they actually created the ghettos that we have now. It became a self fulfilling prophesy. Sad really. Same strategy Bush used regarding Iraq but I think he thought he'd fix things quickly and end up being the hero.
The wealthy certainly don't hero worship Rush Limbaugh and don't fit into the race baited Republican. His fan base are the very people that you assume are Dems. Many of the wealthy would rather that we all eat cake....
The people who would under normal circumstances vote for Obama were he White are not poor Whites. They are middle class moderate Whites who "are not ready for a Black President". For many, the thought of true racial equality (genetically - intellectually, etc.) is a frightening distortion of their entire world view. It is unsettling. If we are all honest. Stating that everyone has the stuff to do what they have done and more if given the chance, is hurtful. Many people are simply not ready to embrace that notion even though they say they believe that the only thing that keeps minorities behind is their mindset. With analysis, I believe that we would discover that what they really hope is that minorities are behind because of their naturally inferior state. Many have expressed that notion on these very boards (many who one wouldn't count among the great thinkers; the notion that they would imagine having genetic superiority over a sheep challenges the senses). However, that fantasy is certainly an intoxicating notion. It means that one is a super human, deserving of everything. Who wants to let that go.
Generally, poor Whites who dislike Blacks may feel as if they don't get to express in a quantifiable way just how society and history has short changed them so why should Blacks.
41 - bliffle
Condemning "old white guys" is the same.
42 - Ted
Despite the Dems and the allied main stream media’s desperation to see Romney as McCain’s Veep, Mitt is clearly out, with (1) Obama doubling down on the class warfare theme (McCain’s 7 houses) and (2) McCain doubling down with ads showing the hypocrisy of Biden attacking Obama in the primaries â€" Romney did way more than that contra McCain.
This leaves only Govs Sarah Palin and Tim Pawlenty. Pro-abortion Ridge and Dem-Lieberman were never real considerations, despite relentless media goading. Pawlenty’s lackluster TV performances, coupled with Palin pizzazz, the primacy of oil drilling and the ticked off women/Hillary voters, does now portend a McCain/Palin checkmate on the Dems. This is so albeit the Dems and liberal media dare not mention Palin’s name, that is, everyone but…..
And if there’s any question as to Palin being uniquely positioned and able to more than nullify Biden in debate, see the excellent discussion at palinforvp.blogspot.com
Team McCain, well done!!!
43 - Clavos
@#40.
OK.
If Obama doesn't win, it was racial--no other reason.
If he does win, will it mean racism is dead in this country?
44 - Zedd
Clav
Don't be silly.
If Obama wins it could be because of his race. His momentum comes from the fact that we all feel good that we trust this black guy to be Prez AND that we have come so far.
If he looses it could be because lots cant see themselves voting for a Black (sorta Black) guy.
All of a person's characteristics do play a role in how politicians are perceived. Race is a significantly noticeable characteristics.
45 - Clavos
His momentum comes from the fact that we all feel good that we trust this black guy to be Prez AND that we have come so far.
Actually, at this moment something less than half of us do, and the number is dropping, because he is losing the momentum he had earlier in the year.
You seem to have a relatively low opinion of the intellectual depth of the American proletariat (with which I concur, BTW) when you say that people are voting for Obama because they "all feel good that we trust this black guy to be Prez AND that we have come so far."
I would rather hope that those who vote for him do so because they think he's the best individual for the job, not because it's time for a black to be President, and they trust this black with the job--that's a totally bogus reason to vote for (or against) anyone. That said, I think you're right, on average, more people vote for candidates for specious reasons like that, than vote for them on their actual qualifications.
46 - Baritone
I also concur with Zedd. Truth be told, most people vote with little actual knowledge of the candidates or the issues involved. Often votes are made in the manner of a beauty contest and little else. That's why all the negative bullshit often sticks, because most people aren't really paying attention.
B
47 - Zedd
Clav, Baritone,
I would add though that our requisite for theatre and feel goods is what makes this country more thrilling, sexy and exciting than most. I would say though that we have gone far too far in the area of not wanting substance and going for the espresso shot every time. I think for many of us, that is the change that we are looking for. Obama is doing a job at delivering the goods.
I would say that Obama does give us both. His answers parallel the way that we think. His response to the race thing was right. We all have bigots in our lives but we love the heck out of them. I wouldn't say that his only positive attribute is his race. I would say that he is a phenomenal person, in that he is practical. Politics has become so predictably spun. We interpret the spin as it is being spun. Flags are simply not enough for us any more, nor are "the bad guys". Cute attack phrases just don't work any more. Everyone is flip flopping and we don't care. We just want someone who can deal with issues as they arise instead of "sticking to his guns no matter what (sexy theater)".
Obama knows how to give us just enough sex appeal to keep us interested while offering pragmatic solutions that we normally wouldn't want to swallow.
Also lets not forget that we need the international appeal. We are fading as the world's leader. The world is following reluctantly. They see our hypocrisy. We preach equality and push different groups to work together and include one another in governance but we suck at it. One man in Germany said "Obama is John Kennedy and Mandela rolled into one". Off course he is not but the fact that he invokes such images is a major win for us. We need it so we need him.
48 - Zedd
Clav,
I think we both missed an important point regarding the Obama poll situation.
It turns out (I love NPR) that Obama is doing fine with women and poor Whites. His big problem was with Catholic voters. Hence the Biden selection. Off course the Clinton folks are still being a pain (27% of them) but I think they will fall in line after the convention if Hillary is a good sport about things.
49 - Clavos
We are fading as the world's leader
A good thing, IMO: for US especially.
50 - Zedd
Perhaps, but we don't know how to be lead. Also, who gets the job.
51 - Dr Dreadful
My politically apathetic wife (although she does occasionally get twinges of conscience that she shouldn't be) asked me last night to tell her who to vote for. I felt like a husband in the 1920s.
I told her I'd pull up one of those websites which compares the candidates issue by issue for her to look at. She asked me who I'd vote for if I was eligible. I said Obama. She said OK.
Aaargh.
52 - Dave Nalle
Perhaps, but we don't know how to be lead. Also, who gets the job.
Why does the world need a single nation to BE the leader? And if we have to have one, I say give the job back to England. They did the best job of anyone who ever had it.
Dave
53 - Pablo
Hmmm give the job back to England, how cute. As in the City of London Davey? Or the East Indian Trading Company? As in the biggest purveyor of narcotics in history?
I got a clue for ya bubba, they never lost the job, and are firmly in power.
54 - Dr Dreadful
Oh boy, here we go.
55 - Pablo
Uhhh was there something that I said that was untrue Dread? I think not.
56 - Clavos
Did Doc say there was, pabbly? I think not.
57 - Pablo
Pabbly? hehehe, you are trying so hard to be as cute as Davey (smear guy) Nalle, but your just not Clavy. Actually, that is why I was asking Dread to clarify his comment, if he cares to.
58 - Clavos
There's nothing to "clarify" pabbly (and BTW that's in homage to your calling me Clavy). You're, as you often do, being disingenuous and trying to pick a fight.
Nothing in what Doc said implies that anything you said was untrue, and you know it, pabbly.
59 - Zedd
Doc,
Close your ears (I mean your eyes, it may get messy)
Dave
"Hmmm give the job back to England"
As the resident Zulu - American WHAT the %#@$%!$#@#$%& you have lost your %$$#@#$*&&%$#$###@ ever luvin mind!!! Rubbish!! whew.... it's out.
60 - Zedd
Dave,
I don't know if we know how to have an egalitarian world government. Also, as eye rolling as i think American pride is, I am an American and have been socialized to assume "bestness". I am competitive and probably couldn't stand being second or third in line.
If things don't change I may be forced to adjust.
61 - Jordan Richardson
Believe it or not, I think the world would be just fine without a clear "leader." I think the notion of a "leader" in today's world is obnoxious and unnecessary, in fact.
62 - Clavos
Believe it or not, I think the world would be just fine without a clear "leader."
I do, too.
And I definitely think the USA would be better off without that burden.
63 - Zedd
Someone WILL want the job. It's human nature. I don't know if you want some countries to take the position.