The CNN team at least gave Clinton a chance to explain why her smashing Florida victory was just that. Russert said "it was a tie; let's move on." No, Tim, it was very much not a tie. Clinton won overwhelmingly in an unsanctioned primary which still drew 1.5mm Democratic voters, not far off the total for the heavily contested Republican primary. To do this, she must have gotten over 80% of the Cuban-American Democratic vote, such as it is. That is, however telling. If she can get run big among Cuban-American Democrats, she's got New Jersey locked up. Moreover, if she can't do that well among Cuban-Americans, how big is she going to show with Puerto Ricans in the States and in PR, Mexican-Americans, Domenican-Americans, and Central American-Americans? Christ, she might get them all.
Given the proportional allocation of delegates, if Clinton does not lay down gin on Super Tuesday, she's going to have to fight to unfreeze the Michigan and Florida delegates that are rightfully hers. I'm a one man band, here. I need some help with research. Does anyone know what the Democratic by-laws are regarding these delegates? Has anyone read anything Howard Dean might have said about it? Jim Dean? I assume that Obama will fight her on that. Does anyone know if there's precedence for a court ruling not to interfere with the by-laws of a trade-association? Precedence for a political party being legitmately called that? If not, then how would the appeals courts tend to rule in each jurisdiction? Would it have to go to state court first? Finally, and this is pure guesswork, let's say it goes to the Supremes. How does everybody think they'll rule. Will they even hear the case? I tend to think they will and will rule 5-4 in favor of whatever they think will hurt the Democrats -- probably in Obama's favor.
The press has crowned Walnuts already, but I'm not so sure he's made gin. The detailed polling showed some good things and bad things. He's sort of kind of closed the sale with Fundies, but that could also be a function of Huckabee's taking Fundie votes away from Romney. I also find it peculiar that at least on CNN, they keep mentioning Walnuts's money woes. If he can't raise a fat stack by later this week, Romney can trump him.
But let's say that it comes down to McCain versus Clinton. I like HRC's chances a lot here. She's got a good hawkish position from which to criticize an unpopular war and she demolishes McCain on brains, economic knowledge and political finesse. Sad as it is to say, she crushes him on the physical appearance vibe. McCain has lots of residual physical problems remaining from his years of capitivity and has been badly disfigured by his many melanoma surgeries. He has to go out in public with more makeup than your average drag queen just to prevent people from turning their heads and looking away. HRC, on the other hand, presents a very crisp and youthful image. She also has a Zen-like calm while he has the shortest fuse in American politics. And she DESPISES McCain and really knows how to get under his skin. Massive meltdown by Walnuts is very possible.
Let's say it's McCain versus Obama. I think that Obama's edge being a Democrat, who campaigned on one comment to one reporter criticizing the now unpopular war in Iraq and who is much much more physically attractive than McCain is, will still have problems. Obama's record on the war is very shaky. He can't do the "Gawd" thing because no Democrat can out-religion a Republican and no Democrat can get to a Republican's right on other social issues. Make no mistake about it. Walnuts is a social-conservative. Obama's just whatever. Moreover, every time a Democrat runs a "let's get beyond partisan politics" campaign, he loses. Obama, like Dukakis, Gore and Kerry will spend the entire campaign agreeing with everything McCain says and not defending himself against any of McCain's attacks.
Personally, I think HRC matches up better against McCain than she does against Romney because Romney also has a calm about him and is flexible enough to get to her left or right as needed, and has an equal knowledge of economics. Obama, on the other hand, matches up better against Romney because he's a more deft flip-flopper and can exploit the built-in Democratic advantage against Romney but not against McCain because McCain can get the Latino vote and Obama will have a lot of trouble there.
I agree this time with the MSM's on-the-one-hand-on-the-other-hand view that Edwards's support will split pretty evenly between HRC and Obama.
Kelso's Nuts love you
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I think I agree with you on Clinton being well-matched against Romney, while probably having an advantage on McCain. I think Obama would have a problem going up against either McCain or Romney, but probably do worse with McCain.
I'm interested to get your take on the running-mate question. I think if McCain is the nominee, Giuliani will be his choice because he'll bring in social moderates. Huckabee would not be a good choice, because McCain doesn't need him to win him the Southern states, the midwest, or the upper midwest. As far as the Dems, I think Edwards has positioned himself very well to be the natural choice for either Clinton or Obama.
kelso,
Your criteria for sketching Hillary's advantages versus McCain don't look so good on paper.
Her position on Iraq means nothing contrasted with a candidate who knows war first hand. She'll look like a white suburban guy trying to go urban black. She got no rhythm.
Brains? That's never decided anything with respect to the White House. Hillary suffers from the perception that she's oh so erudite and an intellectual powerhouse. It looks bad for her brainpower when she is fooled by a husband who lets interns play with his staff.
Meanwhile, war wounds are accepted in the world of male appearance. Bob Dole lost for a lot of reasons, but his smashed arm and shoulder were not among them. In fact, as you know, there are a number of elected officials bearing obvious wounds.
But aging women will suffer as aging women always do. Nancy Pelosi -- often known as Stretch -- looks pretty good. In fact, I'd say she looks almost hot. I like her face. Haven't seen her in person.
But I've shaken hands with Bill and been close to Hillary. With respect to her appearance, Hillary has a lot of female problems.
Assuming she's nominated, she's going to feel the wrath of the fashion and fitness press more than any previous candidate. She'll feel more harassed than Britney Spears.
She'll never wear a dress or skirt. Bad legs. But I'm sure she wants to avoid embarrassing photos of clumsy exits from cars or other conveyances that provide beaver shots for the relentless photographers. She'll also want to avoid any shots with her skirt wedged in her ass.
Thus, she will stick to staid pants-suits that put a tent over the problem areas.
She does not, as you suggest, present a crisp, youthful image. She's got the look of a woman suffering from hormone depletion. In fact, I'd like to know what medications she takes regularly. Her sodden look says she's taking something.
Meanwhile, the notion that her essential nature includes Zen-like calm is too funny. I think she's got a body full of anger. She's not appreciate for her looks. Her looks never rated a "good" rating. Maybe a six. But that's it.
She might have the power to stifle her own rage when others are looking. But that woman is hell on wheels when she short-circuits. I'm sure Bill knows what I'm getting at.
Here's where things appear to be headed.
She's the emotionally abused white woman candidate.
McCain is the while male war hero.
In the calculus of elections, a white male war hero triumphs over an emotionally abused white woman.
kelso, there is another issue Hillary faces, which was raised here by the first poster, suzi riot.
What sap will run as Hillary's VP? Two women on the ticket? Not a chance.
What candidate can be matched with an emotionally abused white woman? Whomever he is, he'll look like a stay-at-home dad.
The idea won't sit well with a lot of voters.
Every time I am forced to listen to tim Russert I remember why I prefer not to have sex with men. I don;t even have to get near that Opus Dei wannabe motherfucker to feel like I need to go and wash myself with lye soap. And to think he could have put Cheney down and opted instead to do the DC two step.
A win is a win my good friend and if anyone thinks that HRC isn't gonna have MI and FL delegates seated and all in her column in Denver then I want some of what they just took because that's some good mind altering shit.
Can someone tell me one state that Obama will carry other then IL next tuesday? Anyone? Bueller?
I didn't even know she had won until I read this post, because the NY Times didn't even put it on page one, but way inside. What do they all have against her?
SuziRiot & No_slappz:
Here's how I priced the possible DEM VP Choices for the Hellions as of the Edwards announcement
CLINTON VP CHOICES (ALL-IN; OBAMA NOMINATED=NO ACTION)
Richardson 7/5
W Clark 11/4
Vilsack 7/1
Edwards 8/1
Kaine 10/1
Nelson (FL) 20/1
Breseden 20/1
Murtha 50/1
FIELD 7/1
nb: over-round = 125% juice = 20c/$
OBAMA VP CHOICES (ALL-IN; CLINTON NOMINATED=NO ACTION)
Kaine 3/1
Sibelius 7/2
Napolitano 5/1
Emmanuel 9/1
Edwards 10/1
Strickland 10/1
Nelson (NE) 12/1
Breseden 20/1
M Johnson (GA) 30/1
Lieberman 50/1
FIELD 9/2
nb: over-round = 127% juice = 21c/$
I'd be happy to share my reasoning. I haven't studied the Republicans closely enough to have a huge opinion yet on the likely VP choices of McCain or Romney. I'll share them when I develop an opinion.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
No_slappz:
Your comments about Clinton and McCain and Pelosi betray if not sexism, at least a rather UNUSUAL (fuck, there's a great Spanish word whose infinitive is "arechar" I want to use here) taste in what you look for in stimulation and what you find not-stimulating, but fuck it, man, I don't judge.
McCain's age has been raised over and over again by his Republican opponents and I began to notice that -- being a hypochondriac myself -- his physical appearance was producing some (another great Spanish infinitive, "marearse") "seasickness" in me.
I find myself turned on by young broads and mature broads, and the better the bacchanal the better, but I gotta be honest with you, I'm not looking at Senator Clinton as a potential sex partner. I've evaluated her as my choice for President. I'm not looking at Nancy Pelosi as a potential sex partner. I find her to be an inadaquate House Speaker and Democratic Congressional leader. And I certainly don't get turned on by older white men's war wounds.
Again, I'm not judging you. Fantasies are the property of them what fantasizes them. I'm looking at a bunch of politicians here and trying to make some guesses as to how things might pan out and which factors may be important. So, while I don't mind your sharing your fantasies here, be aware that I personally don't have an interest in going there really.
I tend to view these people the way I view any random variables. For example I thought Anna Kournikova was pretty and all, but as a professional gambler, to me she was really more whatever number of breaks per set above or below average than she was a sex object. I certainly wasn't ever going to get a chance to fuck her, so, I really didn't bother dwelling on it. That's just me.
I diaagree with your evaluation of HRC as some kind of emotionally-abused hausfrau. She strikes me as a rather competent, learned, Senator who has a good sense of being a Democrat and can handle a tough campaign.
You may have some special insight no one else has into the Clintons' marriage. I don't know them. I don't live with them. I cannot offer an opinion. I think whatever works for them is fine by me.
Just as I don't judge your peculiarites, I wouldn't judge theirs even if I knew what they were.
???????????????????????????????????
Tommy-Gun: I know I'm not in a big hurry to be shaking hands with Tim Russert, myself. Opus Dei wannabe That says it all. But please don't let him be carrying the flag in your mind for our entire gender! There are Tim Russerts and there are Kelsos, while I reckon neither TE ARECHAN (there I used it), and a woman QUIEN TE ARECHA, SI TE ARECHA, I don't even think Russert and I are of the same species, let alone the same gender!
As for the FLA and MI delegates, Clinton will have to fight hard for them and Obama will fight just as hard to keep them frozen and the press will say that Clinton is practicing "divisive" politics and Obama is practicing the politics of "hope." I expect nothing less.
You are right, however, I doubt she'll even need them. Obama gets IL and KS, perhaps AL, perhaps MO.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
G'sB:
They got it wrong in February of 1992 when the Gennifer Flowers story broke and the Clintons hung tough and they've been re-doubling each time in a very sad Great Martingale, to recoup a relatively small embarrassment back then.
For giving me the opportunity to offer that opinion, I'll try to find a youtube song that'll give you a smile.
McCain's running mate?
Rudy. His simultaneous withdrawal from the race and endorsement of McCain was the most obvious job request I've seen in a while.
My opinions on the candidates express impressions I believe many other voters will consider. The question is what others will do. Not what I think or do.
But, because I am a registered Democrat, I will vote for Obama in the NY primary.
That aside, I am always interested in the divergence between public appearances and personal realities. That's where good stories are always found.
Gary'sBoner:
I thought about getting really clever and putting up a youtube of Jonathan Richman And The Modern Lovers' "I'm Straight" which would have dovetailed nicely with the two Queers youtubes, none having anything whatsoever to do with sexual orientation!
No such luck. Only a couple of bad covers available.
Next brilliant idea was a youtube of Jonathan Richman's solo "I Went Dancing At The Lesbian" bar as paean to Diane Tomlinson and to give you a smile -- the 2 birds with one stone theory -- but alas the only youtubes available were low-quality from a Scandinavian tour.
So, I figured there would have to be plenty of choice ditties from the Ben Vaughn Combo. No soap.
One last effort at finding a really esoteric Replacements youtube (hoping for cover of DiFranco Family's "Heartbeat It's A Lovebeat"). Misearble failure, and with that I watched the replay of the Republican debate, the post-game, and went to sleep.
Post a Comment