It should be a Democratic year...then why this???

[Harry Vest]

Good article. Brings up alot of questions I've been asking myself. Given the mood of the country and the absolute disappointment in the Bush Administration Obama should be soaring in the polls. There should be no question that the Democrats will win in November. Half the Republican base (Evangelicals) don't even like John McCain. So what the heck is going on???
Read on and tell me what you think.

RealClearPolitics - Articles - It Should Be a Democratic Year

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by Harry Vest

Good article. Brings up alot of questions I've been asking myself. Given the mood of the country and the absolute disappointment in the Bush Administration Obama should be soaring in the polls. There should be no question that the Democrats will win in November. Half the Republican base (Evangelicals) don't even like John McCain. So what the heck is going on???
Read on and tell me what you think.

RealClearPolitics - Articles - It Should Be a Democratic Year

1. the media love the idea of "McCain the Maverick" -- thus, it's allowed him to distance himself from Bush, who's now regarded by 61% of historians as the worst president in history

2. Obama is relatively unknown. both men are gliding by on their reputations at the moment. wait until the fall when you start to see them head-to-head. my guess is that the first debate will be absolutely critical.



but feel free to freak out.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

my guess is that the first debate will be absolutely critical.

[maycocksean]

To be perfectly honest?

I think it's because one of the candidate is a black fella.

One who is young and has an "Islam" name to boot.

[Harry Vest]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

To be perfectly honest?

I think it's because one of the candidate is a black fella.

One who is young and has an "Islam" name to boot.

Best explanation yet. Probably right.

[deep]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

To be perfectly honest?

I think it's because one of the candidate is a black fella.

One who is young and has an "Islam" name to boot.

It is his lack of experience that leads you to think that he is young.

He is not that young.

There are about 5 presidents that were younger.


It was right there in the article.

So how can Newsweek have the race at a dead heat? How come, even in the polls where Obama is leading, his lead is in single digits? Is it that people still don't know enough about him? No candidate in my lifetime has ever gotten better press coverage, more adoration from the media. Being attacked by Jesse Jackson is a gift of major proportions. Maybe it just hasn't showed up yet in the numbers. Maybe race is a bigger factor than people want to admit. Maybe people just need to be convinced on the experience front. But whatever it is, Democrats should take note. It should be a Democratic year, but that is no guarantee that it will be one.

It is probably one of the first things I ever wrote about Obama.

Something like,
'I like him and expect to enthusiastically support him in a few years when he has some more experience."

[indra]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

To be perfectly honest?

I think it's because one of the candidate is a black fella.

One who is young and has an "Islam" name to boot.

I do think this is a big part of it.

The US is a remarkably conservative country -- more conservative than most people on both sides of the political fence want to admit (the conservatives because who would they blame for all the problems if people finally figured there aren't any liberals in the US? and the so-called liberals because then everyone would realise they aren't really all that different from the conservatives after all) -- and although we say we love "change" "maverick" and "new", we only like new mavericks who look like what we are used to and promote the type of change we are used to and comfortable with.

[Dreadsox]

I believe Obama will win.

I base this on the fact that my grandparents all in their 80's and 90's feel McCain is too old. They all supported McCain in 2000. This to me would indicate that the older generation is not sold on him.

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by deep

It is his lack of experience that leads you to think that he is young.

He is not that young.

There are about 5 presidents that were younger.

He's 46. They weren't younger by much. Who are we talking about JFK? Teddy Roosevelt (who inherited the job as VP)? Few successful presidential candidates have been this young.


Deep, I'm not talking about YOU. I know race is not an issue for you--experience is. The question is why isn't this a Democratic year. If you want to argue that the ONLY reason that the race is as tight as it is--that if he'd been in the Senate for 15 years this would be Obama landslide feel free. But I think you would be wrong. Everybody's not as open-minded as you, deep.

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by Dreadsox

I believe Obama will win.

I base this on the fact that my grandparents all in their 80's and 90's feel McCain is too old. They all supported McCain in 2000. This to me would indicate that the older generation is not sold on him.

I'm not certain Obama will win because I've actually heard of Democratic voters--people who would have voted for Hillary--that won't vote for him BECAUSE HE'S BLACK. And these are the people who will actually admit to it. . .there are certainly more that would never SAY that but nonetheless will vote McCain or stay home just BECAUSE HE'S BLACK.

In order to win he will have to have a lot of people like your grandparents going to the polls to make up for some of the Dem voters and independents who will stay home or vote McCain BECAUSE HE'S BLACK. And as we all know, all it takes is "some"--not even a majority.

[BonosSaint]

I think you are right. Racism, some of it unknowing, will take a part in this election. I think indra is right, too, though. The Democrats will increase their margin, but I'm noticing that a lot of these new democrats are more conservative than previous ones. I think the liberals might take a little uncomfortable notice of that. The numbers might be there, but I don't know that it is the hoped-for ideology.
And I think Deep is right too. The makeup of the Congress is going to be as, or more, essential than whoever becomes president.

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by BonosSaint

I think you are right. Racism, some of it unknowing, will take a part in this election. I think indra is right, too, though. The Democrats will increase their margin, but I'm noticing that a lot of these new democrats are more conservative than previous ones. I think the liberals might take a little uncomfortable notice of that. The numbers might be there, but I don't know that it is the hoped-for ideology.

True that. Why else is Obama "moving to the center." A left wing agenda has much less of a chance than a right wing agenda does in this country (though I concede that the extremes on both the left and right don't have a chance in the U.S.--which is a good thing).

[deep]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

He's 46. They weren't younger by much. Who are we talking about JFK? Teddy Roosevelt (who inherited the job as VP)? Few successful presidential candidates have been this young.

He will be 47 in August

47 years and 5 1/2 months on inauguration day

so these men were younger


John F. Kennedy was born May 29, 1917; he was elected president in 1960, so that made JFK 44 years old when he was elected. JFK was assassinated on Nov 22, 1963 which made him 46 years old at the time of his death.

Robert F. Kennedy was born Nov. 20, 1925; Her ran for president at the age of 42. RFK was assassinated five months shy of his 43rd birthday.

William J. Clinton was born Aug. 19, 1946; he was elected at the age of 46. By the way, Bill is listed as the “third youngest President“. If you listen to Hillary, she has never said Obama is too young because, when Bill was running and elected he was the same age Obama is now. (Obama is older than Clinton was, 1 year and 15 days)


Ulysses S. Grant was born April 27, 1822 and was 46 years old when he was elected.

Theodore Roosevelt was born Oct. 27, 1858 and was 42 years old when he was elected. The youngest U.S. President

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by deep

He will be 47 in August

47 years and 5 1/2 months on inauguration day

so these men were younger


John F. Kennedy was born May 29, 1917; he was elected president in 1960, so that made JFK 44 years old when he was elected. JFK was assassinated on Nov 22, 1963 which made him 46 years old at the time of his death.

Robert F. Kennedy was born Nov. 20, 1925; Her ran for president at the age of 42. RFK was assassinated five months shy of his 43rd birthday.

William J. Clinton was born Aug. 19, 1946; he was elected at the age of 46. By the way, Bill is listed as the “third youngest President“. If you listen to Hillary, she has never said Obama is too young because, when Bill was running and elected he was the same age Obama is now. (Obama is older than Clinton was, 1 year and 15 days)


Ulysses S. Grant was born April 27, 1822 and was 46 years old when he was elected.

Theodore Roosevelt was born Oct. 27, 1858 and was 42 years old when he was elected. The youngest U.S. President

I'm pretty sure Roosevelt was 42 when he BECAME president (after McKinley was shot) not when he was elected.

But that's beside the point. Obama definitely belongs in this little group of younger candidates. The point is his BLACKNESS!

He's a "young" black man. . .scary!

[deep]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

He's 46. They weren't younger by much. Who are we talking about JFK? Teddy Roosevelt (who inherited the job as VP)? Few successful presidential candidates have been this young.

Why do you completely over look and dismiss Bill Clinton who was over one year younger than Obama. Did he not earn it?

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by deep

Why do you completely over look and dismiss Bill Clinton who was over one year younger than Obama. Did he not earn it?

Deep, deep, deep. . .I don't overlook or dismiss Bill Clinton. He most certainly earned it. I'm okay with Bill. . . it's all good.

[deep]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

some of the Dem voters and independents who will stay home or vote McCain BECAUSE HE'S BLACK. And as we all know, all it takes is "some"--not even a majority.

Does Obama need 300 advisers because he is BLACK?

or is it because of his lack of experience?


Cast of hundreds advises Obama on foreign policy - International Herald Tribune ( I got this from Drudge, so I know it is true. )

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by deep

Does Obama need 300 advisers because he is BLACK?

or is it because of his lack of experience?


Cast of hundreds advises Obama on foreign policy - International Herald Tribune ( I got this from Drudge, so I know it is true. )

I don't know but I must go swim in my ocean paradise now so I will get back to you later.

Take care, my friend.

[U2387]

We really do not know whether this is a Democratic year or not yet, regardless of what polls say. Polls have been remarkably wrong many times in the past, Dewey and Truman, 2004 Iowa Dem Primary, 2008 NH Dem primary to name just top of my head ones. It could very well be that despite not being a remarkable Congress or putting up a remarkable Presidential candidate like Biden or Richardson, the Democrats pick up 3 Senate seats and 10 house seats while Obama beats McCain. In fact, most people are betting on this scenario exactly. Yes, the polls now would be different w/ a more experienced white candidate without an exotic background, that is a fact. However, to judge this as not a Democratic yr when it should be is a bit premature. Obama has a legitimate shot at winning states like Virginia, Georgia, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico, states that Republicans have been very strong in recently. I only worry about Florida because of the strong Hillary Democrats, the elderly and the Jews down there not trusting Obama. However, everything I have seen suggests to me that, as someone else mentioned already, the elderly more than anyone else view McCain's age as a liability. My grandparents are older than him and both cringe when they see him get up to walk. Go figure. Ultimately, we will have a much better understanding of this some time in September.

[deep]

If Hillary were the nominee
there would be ignorant people making remarks like
"I will not vote for her because she is a woman."

and many of her supporters would be saying if Hillary is not elected
it is only because of sexism.

I do believe that if many of these same people, would have voted for Margaret Thatcher, if given the chance

So are they really not voting for Hillary because she is a woman?

Or are they just making an ignorant statement ?

and yes, I believe they may very well be sexist



I give this example, because I have had people tell me they would not vote for Obama in a way that suggested it was about race.

and then I asked them if they would have voted for Colin Powell, if they were given the chance? Many of them say yes.
could these people have some racist beliefs, yes

But that would not stop them from voting for an "acceptable" candidate of color

Obama's situation got more complicated because of his close association with Reverend Wright and even that Catholic Priest that made inflammatory statements that have cause some to put an extreme label on Obama.