Posted on 02/15/2008 1:23:35 PM PST by Uncledave
The Problems with Obama [Victor Davis Hanson]
Under pressure to produce some facts and specifics, the Obama team is beginning to release a little on the economy, taxes, and new entitlements. But the problem is that Obama himself seems not familiar with the details, and still prefers talking only about hope and change. Wonks releasing details doesn't solve the problem. And it won't, until he, the candidate, can talk in serious fashion ex tempore about the specifics he wants to achieve.
The other problem could well be racial. His coalition initially was based on the notion that he would capture 60 percent of the black vote in a tough competition against the wife of our first honorific black president, and go on from there to cobble together a coalition with other minorities and elite whites. But his success seems to have been achieved with a slightly different calculus — 80-90 percent of the African-American vote, elite yuppie whites, and students and Moveon.org progressives.
The problem with that is illustrated by Hillary's last-ditch appeal to win Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania with working-class whites and Hispanics. Since the agendas and past voting records of Obama and Clinton are nearly identical, and since he is the far more inspirational candidate, she hopes to tap into a growing resentment that his appeal is boutique for whites, and based on racial solidarity among African-Americans; the former turns off the working classes and the latter other minorities as well as poor whites. I think squaring that circle is every bit as problematic as McCain pacifying the conservative base. And the Democrats would worry about a candidate coming into the convention and beyond that lost the popular primary vote in the key November states of California, Florida, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Texas, and Pennsylvania.
With Hillary, Obama looks youthful and invigorating. But beside the scarred old veteran McCain, he will appear inexperienced and wet behind the ears. Putin's comment that Hillary didn't have a head reminds us that the problems in the world are not, pace Obama, due to misunderstanding or miscommunication, but because thugs like Ahmadinejihad, the Chinese apparatchiks, Assad, Putin, Chavez, etc. profoundly dislike the impediments the United States poses to their respective carnivorous agendas. McCain gets it, the others don't (cf. his Putin KGB quip compared to Hillary's 'duh' redundant remark that Putin didn't have a soul.)
These creepy leaders are more like beady-eyed wolves that wish to break into the global hen-house and prey on the European, African, Asian, and Latin American chickens inside — and so pace back and forth, eyeing the trigger finger of the farmer with the shotgun at the door. They know exactly what they want, and how to get it, and can't wait for the guardian to sit down, discuss their hunger, and invite inside them for discussions — and some lunch.
02/15 02:44 PM
Obama would probably be a disaster as President; I’m still not voting for McCain.
Staged Incident - Obama speaking - woman near the front roll faints, Obama throws to someone next to her a water bottle and says some comments comments about his concern for her. Sounds nice - but this has happened at at least 4 speaking engagement including here in Seattle.
Google: woman faints at obama rally or Obama water bottle.
I agreed with most of the article until I read, “McCain gets it, the others don’t.” I couldn’t disagree more. None of them get it. For me, this election will come down to voting against one of the candidates, rather than voting for one of them.
bump & a ping
I am not a mccain supporter and frankly do not see any of the three candidates as being good for the country....
CNN staging plants from the Hillary campaign.
Hussien’s people using phony fainters, making women swoon.
Bogus debates by YouTube and the MSM.
They know they can get away with it, and we can’t stop them.
Then you are voting for Obama.
No, I am voting third party.
So are we.
KV (adult son) says he would NEVER vote (D).
We still have our primary vote coming in May and will vote (R).
I know some here suggest voting (D) in the primary to help Clinton.
I can’t explain why but I am not comfortable changing tickets to help the lesser of the two horrible choices.
“Putin’s comment that Hillary didn’t have a head...”
Hmm, wow I find myself agreeing with Putin.
I wouldn’t vote for Obama for dog catcher, well maybe, but for President, no friggin way! Holding my nose with McCain.
Some freepers would disagree with this statement. But Hanson is a decent journalist/analyst.
Still, McCain is the least bad of the three, and if he is running against Clinton, he has a greater chance (though that depends on how long Obama can run on charisma and not get into the details and specifics of how he intends to bring about change).
Probably for the entire election. Kerry did that last time. “I have plans, and I’ll tell you what they are after I’m elected.” Look how close he came to winning.
kjo doesn't have a state listed on kjo's FRhomepage, but personally a Californian. All Californians' votes will probably be for the Democratic candidate, and the electoral votes will be for that candidate. So personally have the freedom to vote for candidates who almost definitely will not win. Global2010, being an Oregonian, guessing that the same applies.
Stinks if you live in a 'swing' state. Then you actually could affect the outcome of who is the next President. And of the three, you probably should vote McCain. (general election; not primaries/caucuses/conventions/etc.).
“...this election will come down to voting against one of the candidates, rather than voting for one of them.
I’m afraid that’s going to be true of a lot of us.
That Marxist won't hunt.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.