Great Jumping Horny Toads! Kennedy Endorses Obama

[aimeecc]

My husband and I agree - were both for Clinton.

I found an interesting article on the battle between Clinton and Obama: http://www.economist.com/displaystor...ry_id=10656864
The entire article is good, but I found the below excerpt very perceptive:

The deadlock is deeper than geography or demography: it is about different forms of leadership. Mr Obama is the most inspiring American politician for a generation. Mrs Clinton is an inspiration-free zone—her speech on Tuesday was particularly excruciating—who nevertheless exudes an air of serious-minded competence. Mr Obama's supporters want a president who can inspire Americans to be their better selves. Mrs Clinton's supporters want a leader who can negotiate health-care reforms and mortgage bail-outs. The Obamaites regard Mrs Clinton as a divisive bore. The Clintonites dismiss Mr Obama as a talented wind-bag.

I know a lot of people view Clinton as polarizing. Both her and McCain are abrasive and irritating. I think there's some people, like my husband and I, who this personality trait doesn't bother, wheras others can't stand these traits and will automatically shut out people like that. And my husband and I are cynical when it comes to inspirational poetry. I understand why people like Obama and dislike Hillary, I just don't agree.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by aimeecc

My husband and I agree - were both for Clinton.
I understand why people like Obama and dislike Hillary, I just don't agree.

Why don't you agree? Are your politics morwe in-line with hers? Does she excite you in some fashion? What is it about her that you like?

[aimeecc]

Originally Posted by classicman

Why don't you agree? Are your politics morwe in-line with hers? Does she excite you in some fashion? What is it about her that you like?

I think she has the committment to see something through that requires dedication, and the courage to back down and change positions when all key indicators are for another approach. Some say this is flip-flopping ala Kerry, but its not flip-flopping when it is infrequently done and only after analysis as shown a different approach is warrented. I know people look at the cronies she would appoint and claim same old washington politics. Truth is anyone brings in their favorites. She has a larger pool of advisors to pull from, advisors that are tested, experienced, and know their way around Washington politics. Everyone can say they don't want an insider, but an insider knows how to accomplish things whereas an outsider spends the first years trying to find out who really pulls the strings. She is smart and cunning. I say that in a positive way. I don't want a naive can't we all just get along President who is blind to others motivations. If you look at her positions, she is not as far left as Obama - and I am not far left, so I tend to agree with her positions more. She has more thorough plans than Obama; very solid well defined plans. And she makes decisions. Its all nice and well for Obama to claim he was against the war, but if he had been in the Senate, who knows how he would have voted. If you look at his voting record, he uses the vote of "present" to avoid being criticized. I don't want a President that won't make a decision for fear it would alienate someone.

I like her serious attitude. I like her take no prisoners approach.

It has also annoyed me how the media is hyping up Obama. A few weeks ago, when Obama was behind, instead of headlines like "Clinton wins x state", it was "Obama narrowly loses x state". That was done purposely to continue to paint him as a pontential victor. Yet when Clinton loses a state, its "Obama triumphs!", not "Clinton narrowly loses". When Clinton wins, its because the "middle age female voters came out en masse." Its not "Obama won because black voters came out en masse" when he wins. They've painted Clinton as only getting middle aged women votes, which isn't true.

I'm highly educated - so according to the pollsters I should be for Obama. I'm in my early 30s, so not middle aged - yet - so I should be for Obama. My husband is in his 40s, and a white male, and highly educated, so he should be for Obama. No, he's for Clinton too. Why? She knows how to get things done. And there were no pollsters where we voted.

I voted yesterday. My state went to Obama. I guess I'll vote McCain in the general election because I don't think Clinton's going to get the nomination. Obama's too far left for me, and I don't think he could handle another 9/11.

[Torrere]

Black voters probably don't make up as large a portion of the electorate as middle-aged white women. However, the press has been astounded by the way that Obama has carried the black vote by 90% in most states since South Carolina.

Recently there seemed to be a demographic divide between the Clinton and Obama supporters: Obama has carried young voters (where by "young", I mean under 45), black voters, and the well educated / well off. Clinton has carried older voters (ie > 65), white women, hispanics, and unions.

In yesterday's Virginia primary, however, Obama won every demograpic group except white women, and I think that Clinton's only strong bastion of support was among white women older than 45.