Obama's Lebanon moment

Obama’s Lebanon moment

Quote:

In his beautiful, soaring concession speech, Obama mentioned the town of Lebanon for a reason. I was with him in Lebanon the day before — and what we saw there was a defining moment in the campaign. It surprised him, his staff members, the Secret Service on board the campaign bus, even the bus driver. We turned the corner toward the event and saw hundreds of people lined up through the streets of the town just to see him, to feel his aura and to later say that they’d done it — they’d been there.
There were hundreds more than the venue could hold, and they stood there anyway, and kept coming. Obama, overwhelmed by the overflow crowd, insisted on an outdoor speech before his indoor speech. This much is important, and should be said: Any journalist covering any candidate that day, in that town, would have come away as I did after seeing those people,
saying something akin to the old song lyric, “Something’s happening here.” A colleague of mine contends Obama got caught up in the history he was making. I don’t think that’s quite fair. The candidate didn’t change his message as much as Iowa changed the way we heard it.

That day, I saw people embrace Obama the way people embrace loved ones returning from foreign battlefields. I saw people with small children, brought along simply so their parents could years later tell them, to the point of predictable annoyance, “You were there.”
Losing in New Hampshire may well make Obama a better candidate. While it’s the kind of thing that is always said at times like these by those of us whose names have never appeared on a ballot, I think it might just be true in this case.


My 15 year old son’s class was there, and he got to shake Obama’s hand.
He was bummed out that Obama lost.
Quote:

He was bummed out that Obama lost.


I wasn't there but you can assure your son he is not alone.

D

Good, let’s talk politics. Obama would get thrashed by McCain on the expereince point, if the two went head-to-head. No doubt Obama has grace and intelligence in much more than ordinary amounts, but that’s not the same as experience. I suspect republicans would love to have McCain v. Obama for that reason. We ought to elect someone for some reason other than we like his or her personality - electing the guy we’d want to have a beer with certainly hasn’t worked in the recent past…

Quote:

electing the guy we'd want to have a beer with certainly hasn't worked in the recent past...


You and Dubya drinkin' buddies? :p

I just want the dems to play it smart. I still feel that IF Billary gets the dem nomination, we'll get four more years of repubs and it is time for a change IMO.

D

Women Are Never Front-Runners by Gloria Steinem.

It would be hard to hard a beer with W because he doesn’t drink :slight_smile:

My wife & I both voted for Hillary which was another reason my son wasn’t happy.
I still think she (Hillary not my wife) can win the general election but it won’t be easy.
Actually, Edwards is my favorite but I didn’t vote for him because I didn’t think he stood a chance.

BTW - I work in Lebanon.

Quote: (Mr Soul @ Jan. 09 2008, 7:59 PM)

Actually, Edwards is my favorite but I didn't vote for him because I didn't think he stood a chance.

Hmmm...

Having toured this country 3 times (the last time just a year and a half ago), I really believe that a woman and/or a african american do not stand a chance running for president. I know it is sad, but it seems to me that it is a reality in this ultra conservative time we live in. Sure, both Obama and Hillary would get lots of votes in the cities, but we know you cannot carry the entire country with just the cities.

I think Edwards has the best chance against whomever the Republicans put up as their candidate. In fact, I think an Edwards/Biden ticket would not only win, but actually might be good for the country. Edwards would concentrate on domestic policy and Biden foreign policy.

But of all the ridiculous things I have heard, CNN was spouting that a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket would be a real winner. I don't know, but people were freaked out when we had a jewish white male as a possible vice president just a few years ago. How do you think the Red state common folk would embrace a woman and a black to run the free world? And they would need to get more than just a few of those votes.

So I am sorry you didn't vote for Edwards. I think he and Kucinich actually have their hearts and minds in the right place for the job. If Hillary gets in, the Republicans will spend so much money to discredit her that nothing will get done. Obama may be able to do some good in the White House, but I really do not think the average Joe is ready yet and his lack of experience will be heavily played by the Republicans in the run up to the election.

One of the reasons the election process is so screwed up is that people do not even vote their heart and mind in a primary, much less the election. So I am sad to see you sell out so soon. :disagree:

Mike

Mike - I agree with a lot you are saying and I am concerned about both Obama & Hillary but I do think a black man or a woman can win.
To me, having your attitude, is the ultimate “cop out” because it perpetuates that believe.
So I don’t think that voting for Hillary is a sell-out and I actually agree with many of her positions.

I was originally going to vote for Edwards when the race was much closer but I really don’t think he stands a chance.
If it any consolation, I did give him some money.
I like the Edwards/Biden ticket.
While we’re talking about Edwards, I really thought Kerry should have picked Gephardt as VP in 2004.
I understand why he picked Edwards but I was concerned that it wasn’t going to help him and guess what, it didn’t Kerry at all, whereas Gephardt might have helped in OH and the general mid-west.

We need the system of voting where you rank each candidate and the one that gets the most points wins.
That would eliminate most of these concerns about voting for the “winner” all the time.

Mike, do you mean you don’t think Edwards would win in the general election?

Hi Tom,

If you are speaking to me, I do believe Edwards could win in a general election. I think the best ticket would be Edwards/Biden or possibly Edwards/Richardson and finally Edwards/Obama in that order. Honestly, I like the Democratic field this time around. I really do not “dislike” anyone. I think Hillary has sold out to health insurance companies, but other than that, I like all the Dems. I like Ron Paul (or is it Ru Paul) of the Republicans also. I like Huckabees demeanor, but I think he may be a Hawk in Doves clothing. And I am saddened with the rest of the Republican field. They seem to be working out of the Bush playbook and as we are all finding out, that is a dead end on so many levels.

Anyone here losing their home in the next month or so? :disagree:

Quote:

To me, having your attitude, is the ultimate “cop out” because it perpetuates that believe.


It is not actually “my attitude”. I have lots of first hand experience with what rural America is fed on the radio, TV and on billboards. It is quite shocking for a suburbanite like myself to spend some time traveling slowly across this great country. The average folk are not very tolerant of those who are not “exactly” like themselves. I could be way wrong, but I don’t think so. And I am not really willing to have another Bush clone run this country for another 4 to 8 years. I think my point of view is just realistic considering what I have experienced traveling this country. But again, I could be wrong…

Mike

I agree with Mike - Edwards could win the general election and maybe he has the best chance to. I like him even though his message is an old Democratic message which may not be as relevant today. As it turns out, Dem’s may actually help the poor more than the middle class, at least acccording to the stat’s I’ve been hearing lately.

But I also think Obama & Clinton could win, despite the racism & prejudice, and baggage with Clinton. But I could be wrong too.

Actually, Mike, I was addressing Mike, uh…Mr. Soul.
:)
But thanks very much for the comment.


Mr. Soul Mike - IIUC, you voted for Clinton b/c you thought Edwards didn’t stand a chance in the primary - aren’t primaries about voting for the person we think would be best?
I’m just not quite sure I follow your logic.


Anyway, here’s a puzzle for y’all.
The democratic primary in Michigan is seriously screwed up.
They national party is saying they won’t seat our delegates b/c we moved our primary up a few weeks.
Only Clinton, Gravel, and Kucinich are on the ballot, the others having withdrawn their names, and Kucinich tried to get his removed.
Dodd dropped out. So we can vote for Clinton, Gravel, Kucinich, or undecided (which would allow the delegates to cast their votes however they wanted). Write ins will be thrown out.
If you supported Edwards or Obama, and were at the same time pissed off beyond measure at the way the party has screwed up your part in the “democractic” process, how would you vote?
Vote undecided?
Not vote?
Vote for a Republican, perhaps Paul, to send a message?
Vote for Gravel?
Or perhaps even Clinton?

I have to tell you, the dems are not getting a penny more from me this time around.
I feel disenfranchised.
I’m not the only one upset. And the local news is hardly covering it.
I’d be curious what our international friends have to say as well.
There’s a new attitude afoot - to hell with Michigan, let it rust in peace.

Quote:

Actually, Mike, I was addressing Mike, uh...Mr. Soul.

Yes I realized that but I was just chiming in.

Quote:

Mr. Soul Mike - IIUC, you voted for Clinton b/c you thought Edwards didn't stand a chance in the primary - aren't primaries about voting for the person we think would be best?
I'm just not quite sure I follow your logic.

That's because it's probably not logical (as Spock would say)?!?!
What you say is true about the primaries and I should have kept that in mind when I voted, but this is the first primary I've ever voted in (that mattered), so I'm learning as I go.
In the end, I gave Edwards money but I voted for Clinton because I was concerned about the 10 point lead that Obama supposedly had.
According to the pundits, Edwards could end up having a lot of power in the end, if the race is split.

Quote:

Anyway, here's a puzzle for y'all.
The democratic primary in Michigan is seriously screwed up.
They national party is saying they won't seat our delegates b/c we moved our primary up a few weeks. Only Clinton, Gravel, and Kucinich are on the ballot, the others having withdrawn their names, and Kucinich tried to get his removed.

That is truly bizarre.
Let me get this straight - are you saying that it doesn't matter whether you vote or not, because the delegates won't be counted anyways?

Can the national party really do that?
Why did Edwards and Obama leave?
Can they really throw out write-ins?
That smells really bad to me.
Is Dean responsible for this?
Why do they care if the primary was moved up?

Quote:

If you supported Edwards or Obama, and were at the same time pissed off beyond measure at the way the party has screwed up your part in the "democractic" process, how would you vote?
Vote undecided?
Not vote?
Vote for a Republican, perhaps Paul, to send a message?
Vote for Gravel?
Or perhaps even Clinton?

Can you vote for a Republican if you're registered as a Dem?
If so, then here's how I would vote (order of priority):

1) I'd vote for a Republican if there's one I could stand

2) Vote for Kucinich

3) Not vote and write Dean a nasty letter saying that you'll never give money to the Dem's again.

Edit - I just learned the Republicans did a similar thing by denying 1/2 the votes so you'll have to boycott both parties :-)
Quote: (TomS @ Jan. 11 2008, 7:48 AM)

Actually, Mike, I was addressing Mike, uh...Mr. Soul. :) But thanks very much for the comment.

Mr. Soul Mike - IIUC, you voted for Clinton b/c you thought Edwards didn't stand a chance in the primary - aren't primaries about voting for the person we think would be best? I'm just not quite sure I follow your logic.

Anyway, here's a puzzle for y'all. The democratic primary in Michigan is seriously screwed up. They national party is saying they won't seat our delegates b/c we moved our primary up a few weeks. Only Clinton, Gravel, and Kucinich are on the ballot, the others having withdrawn their names, and Kucinich tried to get his removed. Dodd dropped out. So we can vote for Clinton, Gravel, Kucinich, or undecided (which would allow the delegates to cast their votes however they wanted). Write ins will be thrown out. If you supported Edwards or Obama, and were at the same time pissed off beyond measure at the way the party has screwed up your part in the "democractic" process, how would you vote? Vote undecided? Not vote? Vote for a Republican, perhaps Paul, to send a message? Vote for Gravel? Or perhaps even Clinton?

I have to tell you, the dems are not getting a penny more from me this time around. I feel disenfranchised. I'm not the only one upset. And the local news is hardly covering it. I'd be curious what our international friends have to say as well. There's a new attitude afoot - to hell with Michigan, let it rust in peace.

Geez... Tom... that sucks big time! How can they do that!?!? I don't blame you and other Michigan-ites for being pissed!

D

I was just reading this and it reminded me of long ago.

I used to ask my father if he voted for the winner. My thought at the time was that voting was like a contest. Someone should vote for who they thought WOULD win the election, not who they thought SHOULD win. My father would always loose, and it was obvious HE LOST. He’d never pick the winner. (Should have heard him complaining about Kennedy beating Nixon! “Nixon should have never done those TV debates…”)

Anyway, now days it may be the duty of every voter to vote for the candidate they really think is the best person for the job (in primaries especially). I know that’s a bit unreasonable. To do so strictly can lead to results that aren’t in the best interest of anyone at times (Green Party candidates pulling votes from Gore for example – but around here in WA there was a Conservative Independent candidate that pulled votes from a Republican and the Democrat won by a slim margin for the same reason Greenies get blamed for Gore’s defeat).

What this ends up looking like is that you are either voting for someone or you are voting against everyone else.

And your dad was right about Nixon.

Don’t forget - Clinton won because of Ross Perot. Hopefully, it all works out in the end.

Soul, The only republican I can stand is McCain; and frankly I think Edwards is correct about the strangle-hold big money has on our “democracy.” I would have worked very hard for him here had it mattered. I hope he’s reading this.

Here’s what some are recommending:


Story here:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/10/2713/87225/55/434206