Wednesday, 11 July 2007

481 days 'til election

The leading Democrat in the 2008 presidential race, Hillary Clinton, has been dwarfed by her husband, former President Bill Clinton, as the pundits go wild on America's biggest political couple. Let the gender role debate commence. The headline best summing all of this up: "Hillary's man trouble", referring not only to Clinton's attention magnet hubby but to male voters who are, well, sexist. It's sad, not just for America but for the state of our civilization, that even in the richest and one of the freest and most educated countries enough people still have problems with a black or a woman running for political office. A homosexual or atheist wouldn't stand a chance.

I've come to the conclusion that an Obama-Richardson would be a good ticket (Dodd is not bad either, but he is all the more less known).

However much Obama is shallow (see post), Hillary Clinton is robotic — a political chameleon of sorts whose policies seem to sometimes veer to the right, though she pleases as many as possible in her target demographics. Why, again, does she draw so much contempt from conservatives?
Obama and Clinton — the Democratic heavyweights in the '08 race — both try to kiss up to the special interests fueling the Democratic Party and Washington as a whole while imposing a sort of populism seen often enough in campaigns (see: the irrational electorate). This race, like any other in the United States, is fueled greatly by money. Money might not be able to buy you love, per se, but it can sure help launch you into political office!

McCain and Romney are practically bending over backwards for the GOP base(s). McCain, the senior-most member of the race, second-place to Giuliani, faces the ire of the religious right; anger from some moderates and liberals over his diehard support for the Iraq war and the Bush administration's war policy; and bad feelings from Republican Party partisans and anti-immigrant xenophobes over his moderate immigration views and ability to be bipartisan. Being able to jump across the isle and work with the other side is not always a good thing in American politics, oddly enough.

Selling out hasn't really helped Sen. McCain, but former Massachusetts governor and multimillionaire Mitt Romney's sharp-right-turn transformation is far, far more extreme than McCain's ass kissing. Romney is behind in the polls, but has loads of money, which is more than McCain can say. Social liberal Giuliani — though he has been trying his best to please both sides on abortion — still leads the Republicans in the polls; McCain follows. Poll ratings haven't swayed much for the Democrats either. Clinton leads, then Obama, then Edwards. See this post for more.

Technorati technorati tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Red Hog Diary said...

Hillary's candidacy has been troubling for me. While I am desperate to see the White House returned to the control of a Democrat her willingness to accept nearly 3/4 of a million in campaign contributions from the medical industry after she stopped talking about health care reform and began her Senatorial campaigns is distressing. To me the race is between Obama, Edwards and Richardson.

clearthought said...

Yes. But the problem with modern (and historical, for that matter) Washington is that money talks more than well-guided principal. You need millions and millions to win a campaign, as you well know. It can be distressing to see all the donations various politicians have gotten; but it is no surprise that idiots (note: I call him that not because of his political views but because of his idiotic decisions that actually affect other people) like Ted Stevens get donations from telcos, ISPs, and big media corps. Remember the net neutrality and the lesser-known media/radio flagging fiascos?