Decision ‘08

Gee, Now What?

Feels kind of anticlimactic now, doesn’t it, with the Democratic primary over? Now it’s on to the general election, so we’ll have to switch gears soon and start talking more about the issues when viewed through the lens of each candidate’s positions.

On a general note, Obama has to be considered the frontrunner, because of the very deep anti-Republican terrain surrounding this election. If it makes any sense to say so, however, I think both sides are underestimating the other at the moment. Many Republicans think the negatives of Obama (some legitimate, some, unfortunately, of a bigoted nature) will make him an easy target. Most Democrats think they have a cakewalk ahead of them. I suspect neither will be true.

My early prediction (too early to mean anything, but what the heck) is that the campaign will be close and hard fought, but I expect Obama to win, narrowly.

However, in all fairness, I’m the guy who fully expected to see President Giuliani be sworn in next January, so what do I know?…

9 Responses to “Gee, Now What?”

1 Jacques Distler Says:
June 6th, 2008 at 12:43 am
On the subject of Obama’s negatives, I found this to be a sobering historical perspective.
2 Mark Says:
June 6th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Well, it puts some perspective on things, all right…things HAVE changed, mightily. The racist vote is still out there, of course, but there is no doubt it is far, far smaller than in the era highlighted by your link. It may be impossible to determine how many people in the general election will vote against Obama because of his race, as opposed to legitimate opposition to policies or just a tendency to vote Republican, but it will be a sizable chunk.

In a normal election cycle (if this was, say, 1996), that might be enough to defeat Obama. As I stated elsewhere, though, I think the racist vote will be far overshadowed by the anti-Republican sentiment floating in the air at the moment, and he’ll gain more from running in this particular election cycle as a Democrat than he will lose because of the color of his skin…
3 peter Says:
June 6th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
For a more comprehensive list of things to keep Democratic strategists up at night, see http://nymag.com/news/imperialcity/47551/
4 too many steves Says:
June 7th, 2008 at 8:08 am
If it is okay to vote for him because of his race and that he will be “the first Black Presidential candidate ever” then you have no place objecting to those that vote against him for that reason.

I will vote against him, as opposed to for McCain, because of the vastness of his inexperience. He has less experience in government and public affairs than did George W. Bush when he ran in 2000.
5 dch Says:
June 7th, 2008 at 9:00 am
too many steves has it right-you can’t have it both ways-Obama attends and supports a racist church for over 20 years and 90+% of blacks are supporting Obama and what do we hear about-the theoretical racism of white people-priceless
6 Mark Says:
June 7th, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Who is saying to vote for him because of his race? Certainly you’ve never heard that here - all I’ve called for is to vote upon the issues, not the color of the skin.

But let’s be unequivocal. To not vote for Obama BECAUSE he is black is the very definition of racism. I’ll not have any part of it. I won’t vote for Obama, either, but I will give good reasons for my opposition, not reasons based on skin color. Too many steves, you give good reasons yourself - surely you will join me in opposing those who will use Obama’s race against him, when there are legitimate reasons (policies, inexperience) to vote against him.

I want to win this campaign for the right reasons, reasons I will do my best to outline between now and November - but if the only way to win is through shameful, degrading, disgraceful race-based tactics, than I’ll choose to lose, thank you very much…
7 too many steves Says:
June 8th, 2008 at 7:34 am
Mark - sorry for the confusion - I was not accusing you of anything of the type, just making a counterpoint to some of the rhetoric I’ve heard in the media and elsewhere (maybe a little bit here). I agree wholeheartedly that voting for or against him based on his race is racist and will argue against that as a legitimate point of decision, even if it is merely a tie-breaker.

If Obama wins, and I expect he will (certainly in my home state of MA), then I will support him as my President. He has wonderful leadership qualities and I, personally, find him very likable (as I did Reagan, Bush I, W. Clinton, & Bush II). No matter what my conservative friends may argue, he won’t be a disaster for our country. Our system is set up to make sure that can’t happen.
8 Mark Says:
June 8th, 2008 at 11:24 am
You know, people always exaggerate how much difference the president makes anyway…certainly he is a major foreign policy presence, but on the domestic front, half of Obama’s bad ideas (from my point of view) won’t get enacted, anyway…not that I don’t find myself more sympathetic to McCain’s policies, on the whole…
9 Ryan Says:
June 9th, 2008 at 7:40 am
It will be a never-ending source of frustration for many of us that half of Obama’s ideas will never be enacted and virtually all of George W. Bush’s have been.

I do, however, find the experience argument unconvincing. What sort of experience do we want him to have? Executive experience? That would seem to disqualify both candidates. Life experience? He’s 46, has lived/been all over the world, and worked on the streets of Chicago. Experience as an elected official? Reagan had less. Foreign policy experience? Reagan and Clinton both had less. None of this is to say experience means nothing; I’m just not sure what the argument is supposed to mean. Other than the current President, whose problem I would argue is that he’s a complete buffoon rather than a neophyte, what evidence do we have that “experience” is correlated with success?