Is the fad over? We'll know in mere hours..
It's been almost effortless to support Obama – because he's nearly weightless. You don't have to overlook much, because there's little there to overlook.. Which is probably why he's capturing the youth vote.
That in itself may be a contradiction in terms. The young don't vote.. They talk big, as young people are wont to do, but when it cones to actually voting, that's another story. Someone pointed out that they loved McGovern but didn't vote for him even in the middle of a raging war and a draft.
Many of the positive things we hear about Obama are the same things we heard about Bill Clinton in '92. But Clinton was successful for other reasons: he didn't rely on the youth vote, he had a spectacularly bad opponent, he had a strong third party candidate to split the opposition, and there were other lesser factors such as Dan Quayle.
And still, Clinton couldn't get anywhere near a majority of the vote.
Obama has considerably less stature than Clinton (I never imagined I'd be able to say that), and Obama's candidacy is based on gimmicks – he's the black guy with the mellifluous tone, who makes women weak in the knee, but when the same tone plays on and on, it gets irritating.
We've been experiencing his high energy, high visibility campaign, but is there anything behind it? For example, since all the fainting at Obama rallies drew national attention, has it happened lately? Was it a gimmick? Who knows, but focusing on it has apparently caused people to come to their senses.
Hillary has unusually strong negatives, but, her core group – women, is, shall we say, somewhat larger than Obama's – blacks. Although if you include flakes as part of Obama's core group, he probably has a huge edge on paper, but they're flakes for God's sake, so who knows where they'll be in November?
Also, Obama, being black, loses a certain segment of people on the left. A black conservative candidate would not have that problem, since conservatives don't vote by group except for the evangelicals. What matters to conservatives are a person's views, experience, integrity… you know, the sort of things that are insignificant to liberals
Let me give you an example: Condoleeza Rice is a stinking dog. I don't say that because she's black, I say that because she's a stinking dog. OK, I apologize if you're easily offended by that characterization… like if you feel that's an affront to stinking dogs? Oh all right, would you prefer malodorous cur?
Years ago when it was suggested that Rice might be the negative of Hillary… there's probably a better way to put that, but anyway, when Condo was touted as a potentially ideal Presidential candidate, I said, "Huh?" And that was long before she sold out Israel.
I said that because it was sufficient acknowledgement. Rice had never impressed me. Sure she's so credential laden that, similar to large-breasted women, it's amazing she can walk upright, but every time she opened her mouth, she sounded… well… dolt-like… and occasionally, like a dolt on steroids!. Hey, maybe she should have credential reduction surgery?
Where was I? OK, not only will Obama lose the bigots, but he'll also (rightly) lose the Jews, and there's nothing he can do to regain either's support. Now there are McCain bigots to be sure, but I believe they are far fewer than it might seem. They are the right's version of Obama's loud left.
Hillary doesn't have any specific group that would vote against her en masse, unless you call those who can't stand her for various reasons a group? And right-wing radio hosts do so Obama is the more formidable McCain opponent, to them.
But Obama's far more likely to peter out or go down in flames. And according to reports, he looked positively shell-shocked yesterday when reporters suddenly demanded he answer real question. That guy's the Obama I thought I saw all along. And that guy actually fled the news conference.
Now let me say one sort of positive thing about Hillary. Sean Hannity said that he doesn't see much difference between Obama and her. I think there's plenty of difference, and there's plenty between her husband and her as well..She's strongerr.
Not only would I have infinitely more trust in Hillary making decisions than I would Obama, but I believe that Hillary would love to have her name associated with a positive outcome in Iraq, whereas Obama would not only accept defeat and all it's consequences, he'd even orchestrate it.
Don't take any of that as an endorsement. I only mention it to demonstrate that Hillary is the tougher opponent for McCain. In fact, Clinton is more similar to McCain than she is to Obama.
I think McCain can beat Mr. In-Between, but if you feel he can't beat either Democrat, vote Hillary. And in the final analysis, if you like the idea of a Justice Obama or Justice Clinton, vote Democrat. You'll be glad you did.
Now this: I wondered how she'd do it, and now we know: Ann Coulter has found a way to save face and vote for McCain. She said that if he chose Romney for VP (his only real choice, anyway), she'd vote for him. Wow, she's easy.