Tuesday, 5 February 2008

Super (Tuesday) aftermath

The primary results tonight solidified the campaign of Republican John McCain; he currently almost triples Romney in number of delegates. McCain won delegate-rich states such as New Jersey and New York, and is on track to win California. It looks like Huckabee supporters in the realist camp chose (i.e. defected to) McCain after all. However, Super Tuesday only intensified the campaign on the Democratic side between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Clinton currently is ahead of Obama in the crucial state of California, and has already taken such states as New Jersey, Massachusetts, and New York; whereas Obama found his strength in the south, taking Georgia. Candidates on both sides are in a near tie in the telling bellwether state of Missouri. Obama won his home state of Illinois, another important state delegate-wise. (When I say 'won' I mean either solidly won or is projected to win. Either way they'll take it.)

Points have been made about Obama's liberalness (e.g. National Journal report — see this post), but the labels "liberal" and "conservative" are more complex than we take them to be. Political Compass, a site I've written about before, has a new graph up of all '08 candidates positions on a two-dimentional political chart.

When examining the chart it is important to note that although most of the candidates seem quite different, in substance they occupy a relatively restricted area within the universal political spectrum. Democracies with a system of proportional representation give expression to a wider range of political views. While Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel are depicted on the extreme left in an American context, they would simply be mainstream social democrats within the wider political landscape of Europe. Similarly, Hillary Clinton is popularly perceived as a leftist in the United States while in any other western democracy her record is that of a moderate conservative.

Obama is more 'liberal' on Iraq — in reality, all current candidates fail on Iraq in my book; there is a lack of moderacy — whereas Clinton has more left-leaning domestic initiatives, such as healthcare.

I have yet to support a Democrat, although I am starting to lean towards Clinton because I'm getting sick of Obama's pledge for yet-undefined 'change'. Overall the Democrats have failed to not disappoint this election season. I stick to my support of McCain on the Republican side, although he is, after all, a conservative.

For more results, see CNN.

P.S. I promise to devote the rest of this week to non-election news and issues. It's so easy to get carried away...


Tom said...

see video part 1: FRAUD on Voters by The Nation and Chris Hayes, Part 1 (Gravel omitting and overlooking that Obama violates international law)

see video part 2:FRAUD on Voters by The Nation and Chris Hayes, Part 2 (Obama violates international law)

Chris Wilcox said...

Obama's pledge for yet-undefined 'change'.
Are you kidding me? You could only make that claim if you had already made a decision and you were happy with the status quo.


clearthought said...

Thanks for the posts guys.

As far as Obama goes, Red Hog, I remain unimpressed. I have read his stances on the issues. One of the only policies of his that differs from Hillary Clinton's is healthcare, and in that category I have to say I support her plan. I hope our difference in opinion on who we support for the Democratic candidacy does not drive a wedge in our friendship.

chris wilcox said...

We are good to go Clearthought! Progressives Rule!