Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
one...two...tree

The Democrats Have a Nominee

8 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Country: Philippines
Timeline

By DANIEL HENNINGER, WSJ

So what?

Other than ensuring the Greatest Show on Earth will continue, does it matter that Hillary Clinton defeated Barack Obama Tuesday in Pennsylvania by nine-plus points? Barack Obama is the nominee.

No matter how many kicks the rest of us find in such famously fun primary states as Indiana and South Dakota, it's going to be McCain versus Obama in 2008.

I believe the cement set around the Clinton coffin last Friday. The Obama campaign announced it had received the support of former Sens. Sam Nunn of Georgia and David Boren of Oklahoma.

Both are what some of us nostalgically call Serious Democrats. They represent what the party was, but is no more: sensible on national security, spending and middle-class values. Obama receiving their imprimatur is like hands reaching out from the graves of FDR, JFK and LBJ to announce: "Enough is enough. This man is your nominee. Go forth and fight with the Republicans." Make no mistake: Superdelegates with sway took notice.

Former Sen. Nunn is sometimes mentioned as a possible running mate for Sen. Obama. In a better world, Sam Nunn (or a David Boren) would have been the party's candidate for president. Such candidacies remain impossible under the iron law of Democratic primary politics: No centrist can secure the party's nomination in a primary system dominated by left-liberal activists. The iron law produces candidacies such as McGovern (1972), Mondale ('84), Dukakis ('88), Gore ('00) or Kerry ('04), who pay so many left-liberal obeisances to win in the primaries that they cannot attract sufficient moderates at the margins to win the general election.

Bill Clinton, who broke that law twice, knows all this. His 1996 triangulation campaign dangled welfare reform and spending restraint. It worked.

Hillary Clinton knows all this. In 2005, just after George W. Bush won re-election buoyed by "moral values" voters, Sen. Clinton reached out to them in a January speech: "the primary reason that teenage girls abstain [from sex] is because of their religious and moral values. We should embrace this." By "we" she meant that voters still wedded to middle-class respectability, say in Ohio, should embrace her.

She has worked hard as a member of the Armed Services Committee to establish her bona fides with general officers, and some have endorsed her. As well, her hedged, equivocal vote "for" the Iraq War was mainly a centrist investment to cash in fall 2008. (The left won't allow it; see iron law above.)

The 2008 nomination was hers. There was no competition. She was a lock to run for the roses against the Republican nominee. Republicans must have had this conversation a hundred times back then: "It's Hillary. She's got it. Get over it."

Sam Nunn and David Boren by political temperament should be in her camp. Instead, they threw in with Obama, who calls his campaign "post-partisan," a ludicrous phrase. The blowback at ABC's debate makes clear that Obama is the left's man. So what did Messrs. Nunn and Boren see?

The biggest event was the Clinton Abandonment. In a campaign of surprises, none has been more breathtaking than the falling away of Clinton supporters, loyalists . . . and friends. Why?

Money. Barack Obama's mystical pull on people is nice, but nice in modern politics comes after money. Once Barack proved conclusively that he could raise big-time cash, the Clintons' strongest tie to their machine began to unravel. Today he's got $42 million banked. She's got a few million north of nothing.

But it's more than that. Barack Obama's Web-based fund-raising apparatus is, if one may say so, respectable. The Clintons' "donor base" has been something else.

It is hard to overstate how fatigued Democratic donors in Manhattan and L.A. got during the Clinton presidency to have Bill and Hillary fly in, repeatedly, to sweep checking accounts. The Lincoln Bedroom rental was cheesy. Bill's 60th birthday gala (tickets $60,000 to 500K) was a Clinton fund-raiser. The 1996 John Huang-Lippo-China fund-raising scandal pushed Clinton contributors toward a milieu most didn't need in their lives. Hillary's 2007 Norman Hsu fund-raising scandal was an unsettling rerun of what the donor base could expect from another Clinton presidency.

It was all kind of gross, but the Clintons never seemed to see that. When Obama proved he could perform this most basic function in politics, it was a get-out-of-jail-free card for many Democrats. For some, this may be personal. For others, it is likely a belief that the party's interests lie with finding an alternative to the Clinton saga. One guesses this is what Sam Nunn and David Boren concluded.

Ohio, Texas and Pennsylvania prove it won't be easy. Barack Obama himself said Tuesday night, "I'm not perfect." He heads to the nomination freighted with all the familiar Democratic tensions that keep a Sam Nunn off the ballot: race and gender obsessions, semipacifism and you bet, bitter white voters. So be it. For modern Democrats, winning the White House always requires some sort of magic to get near 50%. For the Clintons, that bag is empty. The Democrats have a new magician. It's Obama.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1208995215...days_columnists

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline

is steven getting in his daily quota to tide him over for tomorrow? :hehe:


* ~ * Charles * ~ *
 

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

 

USE THE REPORT BUTTON INSTEAD OF MESSAGING A MODERATOR!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Timeline
All this hate from the Obama supporters, so sad.

What hate in particular did Steven post here? What I read was a well thought through and formulated argument that he wished to share with us. If that counts for hate in your world, then I feel truly sorry for you. Hope you'll get over it soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: Too funny. Feel sorry for me as you wish, that's up to you.

However, I do say that I am somewhat fed up with all these moaning about Hillary not giving up threads. The Dem party has a way of choosing their nominee. The process is going along on its path. You and other people may not like it, you may not agree with it, but that is how the Dem party does its thing apparantely.

I would have thought the more sensible plan than to endlessly moan on about how Hillary is this that and goodness knows what else (very petty and high school) some threads about all the great things Barack has in store for us when he gets elected would be more interesting and productive. However, that would be a little more effort than copying and pasting these 'non stories'.

The hate I was referring to was from you Steve, not the author and it was very tongue in cheek but you can take it whatever way you please.


Refusing to use the spellchick!

I have put you on ignore. No really, I have, but you are still ruining my enjoyment of this site. .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Filed: Timeline
:lol: Too funny. Feel sorry for me as you wish, that's up to you.

However, I do say that I am somewhat fed up with all these moaning about Hillary not giving up threads. The Dem party has a way of choosing their nominee. The process is going along on its path. You and other people may not like it, you may not agree with it, but that is how the Dem party does its thing apparantely.

I would have thought the more sensible plan than to endlessly moan on about how Hillary is this that and goodness knows what else (very petty and high school) some threads about all the great things Barack has in store for us when he gets elected would be more interesting and productive. However, that would be a little more effort than copying and pasting these 'non stories'.

The hate I was referring to was from you Steve, not the author and it was very tongue in cheek but you can take it whatever way you please.

Well said PH. Well said. :thumbs:

She raised $10M for her campaign (in a record time) and yet ll Steven can say is:

Somethings fishy about it. Hillary hasn't been able to raise that kind of money in such a short time until now....and then all of sudden she breaks any record that Obama had. I smell fish. Call that what you will, but it doesn't make sense. It will be telling to see whether this sudden surge in donations continues or if it was just a curious blip on her entire campaign.

Mature debating or bullsh*t? The writing is clear as day.

Edited by illumine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would have thought the more sensible plan than to endlessly moan on about how Hillary is this that and goodness knows what else (very petty and high school) some threads about all the great things Barack has in store for us when he gets elected would be more interesting and productive. However, that would be a little more effort than copying and pasting these 'non stories'.

That is the $40,000,000 question or whatever cash he has amassed for his campaign. All I hear is Clichés from the campaign and his supporters rather than concrete approaches. Like the he is change statement. Which in reality is saying he is the first black candidate.

Edited by Boo-Yah!

According to the Internal Revenue Service, the 400 richest American households earned a total of $US138 billion, up from $US105 billion a year earlier. That's an average of $US345 million each, on which they paid a tax rate of just 16.6 per cent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
- Back to Top -


Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...