Obama to Run

[Pangloss]

Looks like Barack Obama is tossing his hat in the ring, running for US President in 2008.

 

http://news.google.com/?ncl=1112770653&hl=en

[ecoli]

not unexpected. I expect his biggest contender will be Hillary. Which way do you think the primary is going to go?

 

I hear that Hillary is more popular right now, but I feel that Obama is the cleaner choice. Hillary does have alleged scandals in her past. But, that may not even come up in the election.

[Sisyphus]

Nobody is going to dredge up scandals during the primary. They'll wait until she's nominated, and then the Republicans will pile it on via third party organizations, a la the swift boat guys.

[ecoli]

which is why I think the dems need to find someone with a cleaner history, but still a dynamic speaker, so that they have a chance to win the actual election.

which is also why John Edwards is out.

[GutZ]

I am always impressed by Obama, so I wouldn't mind if he ran and won.

[ecoli]

I am always impressed by Obama, so I wouldn't mind if he ran and won.

 

I'm impressed by him as well, but I'm afraid that his positions in Iraq are "cut out and run." I admire his clear position in this matter (not like a lot of other vague politicians) but I'm not convinced that this will help the situation there.

 

In other words, I want to hear a fool proof stradegy for Iraq before I'd vote for him... unless, of course, his opponent's position is even worse.

[GutZ]

I'm impressed by him as well, but I'm afraid that his positions in Iraq are "cut out and run." I admire his clear position in this matter (not like a lot of other vague politicians) but I'm not convinced that this will help the situation there.

 

In other words, I want to hear a fool proof stradegy for Iraq before I'd vote for him... unless, of course, his opponent's position is even worse.

 

Yeah I find it difficult, Generally I find him honest and if that is true, I find that an extremely important quality for national leadership, along with some intelligence of course. If I were American, I'd be willing to waiver off some of his ideas I don't agree with, just for that quality.

 

The iraq war is a big issue though.

[john5746]

Everyone is conecntrating on Obama's personality because he doesn't have much of a history and his positions on various topics are not well known. As his positions become more clear, we will see how he pans out. I think he has a big advantage just being black. He has that category, whereas Hillary does not have women as a given.

 

I think Obama should at least serve one term as Senator, but then again many youngsters have done some amazing things in the private sector, so why not government?

[bascule]

Barack Hussein Obama. Yes, he's nothing like Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden. He's more like Ahmadinejad. Or actually, maybe he is like Osama. Or maybe he's more like

.

 

At present Obama is my preferred candidate to win. Go Obama!

[ecoli]

Everyone is conecntrating on Obama's personality because he doesn't have much of a history and his positions on various topics are not well known. As his positions become more clear, we will see how he pans out. I think he has a big advantage just being black. He has that category, whereas Hillary does not have women as a given.

I wonder how many people (males & females) actually identify Hillary with "women-hood."

I think a black president is more probable than a female president, but it's interesting to see how the "Affirmative action" plays out.

but also, Hillary has more money than Obama, and she has more experiance, and has been around longer... therefore is more identifiable to the voters. Also, I think Obama may have something something about not running against Hillary.

 

Also, I'm not afraid of Obama's inexperiance. After all, that's what advisors are for. And look at the Bush administration... all those experianced advisors and they still **** things up, so I'm not too concerned about that.

[bascule]

Obama's inexperience could prove an asset. I think people are tired of "politicians" and want change. They're probably too dumb to figure out what that change is, so that may translate to voting for someone inexperienced.

[Pangloss]

It's interesting that so many Democrats are pinning their hopes on yet another outsider. The similarities to the 1992 Clinton campaign are remarkable. Of course Obama is even more of an outsider, since he was a completely unknown state legislator just two years ago. But the youthful aspect is similar, the fact that he's still a relative outsider to Washington is similar, and so on.

 

It will be interesting to see if he can capture moderate/centrist voters as well as Clinton did (although it's arguable that Clinton never really did, but I think it's clear that Obama will have to). One point in Obama's favor is that (if I'm not mistaken) he's the one and only presidential candidate who has never been in favor of the war in Iraq on any level.

 

At any rate, his honeymoon with the press is now over. Gennifer Flowers redux in 5... 4... 3... 2....

[ecoli]

It's interesting that so many Democrats are pinning their hopes on yet another outsider. The similarities to the 1992 Clinton campaign are remarkable. Of course Obama is even more of an outsider, since he was a completely unknown state legislator just two years ago. But the youthful aspect is similar, the fact that he's still a relative outsider to Washington is similar, and so on.

 

It will be interesting to see if he can capture moderate/centrist voters as well as Clinton did (although it's arguable that Clinton never really did, but I think it's clear that Obama will have to). One point in Obama's favor is that (if I'm not mistaken) he's the one and only presidential candidate who has never been in favor of the war in Iraq on any level.

 

At any rate, his honeymoon with the press is now over. Gennifer Flowers redux in 5... 4... 3... 2....

 

I stil think that Hillary is the favorite to win the democratic primary, despite the fact that she hasn't even announced it yet.

 

On the one hand, Hillary is a very recognizable candidate, stemming from her experiances as first lady and then senator. On the other hand, Obama has been getting a lot of press lately, and by the time the election rolls around, he may be just as recognizable as Hillary.

 

However, as much as people like to say they enjoy seeing a fresh face, in reality, people are generally afraid of change, and they may feel more comfortable voting for a "Clinton" than an "Obama," Just because its familiar. However, the press exposure Obama is getting now will be great if ever decides to run for the highest office in the future.

[bascule]

At any rate, his honeymoon with the press is now over.

 

Yeah, now the press is linking him to Osama bin Laden and child molesters. "Whoops".

[Sisyphus]

I wonder how "President Barak Hussein Obama" would play in the Arab world.

 

Seriously, though, if there's a black President, will Al Sharpton finally go away?

[Pangloss]

No, but I hear one of the Duke Lacross players was found naked in an alleyway with the word "whitey" scribbled all over him.

[ParanoiA]

I'm with Pangloss. The similarities with the Clinton era are stunning. It was quite successful, so I guess they're just doing it again.

 

But please don't mislead yourselves so far that you actually believe Obama is not a politician. The devil's greatest trick was proving he didn't exist.

 

The democrats are very good at this. Remember, you're talking about well educated, learned men and women that pretend to fight for the "common man", the "working man" and so forth - been duping voters for decades with that rhetoric. Half of their constituents are the poor, uneducated, working class - most of whom don't have the time or energy to think much about politics - they're too busy trying to find a little happiness in their depressing, busy lives. The other half are middle class, many of which just graduated from the ranks of poor and uneducated - they're too busy watching reality TV and listening to some music star's anti-war, let's all love one another cure for terrorism. These people are very easy to sway - just repeat what they already believe - truth is irrelevant. Obama is instant god with them. They've never heard of him and he "feels their pain". That'll work, elect him!

[Sisyphus]

Does that rant have anything to do with Barak Obama?

[Mokele]

Honestly, I like the guy from what little I've seen of him. He talks about important shit that gets ignored, like gerrymandering, which wins him points in my book.

 

Mokele

[ParanoiA]

Does that rant have anything to do with Barak Obama?

 

Yes, in that he is an opportunist, just like the guy that's in charge right now. Only GWB is also bought and paid for...I can't say the same for Obama yet. With the similarities to Clinton's reign, I just think people should remember that he is a politician, instead of immediately taking to him just because he says all the right things. Every good salesman says the right things. That's how they sell shit.

[Helix]

Even though I'm a leftist, I dislike Obama.

 

First, he's not "liberal" enough for me; he seems to be just a centrist-republican. If the DNC is going to get a candidate, I'd like them to actually find a liberal.

 

Second, he has almost no experience, and considering the fragile state the US is in, we need an expert. He's been a Senator for only a breif period of time, during which he got very little done. It seems he just wanted the word "Senator" for his Pres. Resume, and thought little of the actual job.

 

Mokele is right, he does pay attention to important issues, but I honestly don't view him as a strong oval-office-worthy candidate. That's just me.

[Pangloss]

That "centrist-republican" charge makes me curious, because conservatives are calling him the most liberal candidate in years. Obviously there's going to be spin coming from various quarters about him throughout the election cycle, but I assume your opinion is an honest one. But I'm curious how you drew that conclusion. Do you see any of the other candidates as being closer to your position? Is it a specific-issue thing?

 

If you don't want to share it's cool, but I'd like to hear more. You're not the first person I've heard say that, and I don't assume it means you're way out there to the left, either (though maybe you are, I don't know).

 

OnTheIssues.org also has him pegged as on the liberal/centrist line, but this makes little sense to me as well, given his statements and voting record (posted on their own site).

[Helix]

That "centrist-republican" charge makes me curious, because conservatives are calling him the most liberal candidate in years. Obviously there's going to be spin coming from various quarters about him throughout the election cycle, but I assume your opinion is an honest one. But I'm curious how you drew that conclusion. Do you see any of the other candidates as being closer to your position? Is it a specific-issue thing?

 

If you don't want to share it's cool, but I'd like to hear more. You're not the first person I've heard say that, and I don't assume it means you're way out there to the left, either (though maybe you are, I don't know).

 

OnTheIssues.org also has him pegged as on the liberal/centrist line, but this makes little sense to me as well, given his statements and voting record (posted on their own site).

 

I've heard that claim too - that he's a very liberal candidate - but I honesty believe he's not that liberal. Yes, he tows the Dem. line for some issues, of course, but on others he's just a blue Republican:

 

-- On immigration, while he supports a guest-worker program, Obama also backed construction of an 700 mi border fence. Not very liberal.

 

-- He has not ruled out military actions against Iran. I was shocked to hear this, as this is a very GOP viewpoint.

 

That may only be two issues, but on them he is very conservative and they are some of the more important issues of the day. Granted, I'm far more than "a liberal", so maybe I want candidates to be more leftist than the DNC would like them, but he still appears to have some "red" in him.

 

But hes better than Hillary. Anyone would be.

[Pangloss]

I appreciate the reply. I always hesitate to delve too far into someone's personal choices on candidates because it opens them up to personal attacks from people who disagree with them. Besides, if you're anything like me these opinions take a long time to form and it's hard to keep an open mind when people are bashing you along the way! I'm sure a lot of folks will disagree with you on those issues, but that's your honest opinion and I, for one, respect that.

 

Anyway, those are definitely hot-button issues that you've identified, and they'll most certainly be part of the mix as we go forward. I'm seeing a lot of thought along those lines from people on both sides of the aisle, and one thing it suggests to me is that this election may be much more about general ideologies and issues. The last two elections seemed more about personalties and moralities. I'm sure personalities and moralities will play a role, but I can't help but wonder if the public debate is back to where it needs to be -- on the issues.

[Helix]

I agree, it can be hard to formulate an opinion with people bashing its rudiments along the way.

 

And I hope that this next election will be based on issues; there is a good chance this will be the case. The American people have seen what a candidate with all charisma and no plans can do to a nation, and I believe that come election they will vote for someone who not only smiles nicely for CNN but also has the convictions and blueprints to drag our nation out of the holes we are currently in. I'm an optimist.