Obama and Clinton Have Shown Us Who They Are -- Now, Superdelegates, Just Choose

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS
by Christine Bowman

Here they are in a nutshell: Now choose!

It's been said we could gauge how Obama or Clinton would govern as president by what they would show us between January and August of 2008. We're at the halfway point of that timeline now, so let's review what they've shown us. Surely there's enough there for any undeclared superdelegates and the remaining voters to make their decisions?

Candidate Hillary Clinton is the seasoned politician. She's strategic and a fighter. She reacts quickly to surprises. She's adept at focusing media attention and playing to her strengths, which include great debating skills and a sharp mind. She can use to advantage Bill Clinton's legacy of advisers and deep party support and corporate backing. She commands respect. She knows her way around Washington and the campaign trail. She's feisty, fiery, familiar.

Describing the obverse of those strengths, though, one also might feel:

She has been unprincipled, inconsistent, low-down. She's guided by the old Clinton administration power brokers and has-beens. She disregards and maneuvers around new party rules meant to ensure the Democratic Party can win and grow. She's financed by big business fat cats who'll want their payback. She runs on sound bites and polling, not principles. She has run her campaign reactively and erratically, repeatedly ousting and reshuffling top advisers. She adapts hot-button and wedge issue Republican attacks to her own purposes. She's got baggage. She's not just "Hillary," she is "The Clintons."

Turning to what candidate Barack Obama has shown us since January, he is an exceptional speaker and a big picture guy. He has powerfully organized voters and small donors and his very disciplined campaign organization. He shows restraint. He believes in America's promise for all and has reawakened that dream for many. He's idealistic and has inspired the young. He's a stylish, fresh face in government who projects confidence and calm looking to the future. His approach is steady and deliberate with attention to rules. He and his supporters transcend old categories. He appeals to our better selves and gives other countries new optimism in regard to America's leadership on the world stage.

Obama's same strengths, turned inside out, would be:

He seems naive and too willing to trust. He is too intellectual, too soft, too new, too foreign. We don't know him. How can politics be based on concepts like hope and change? His big crowds scare us. We've been inspired before by lofty sounding Democrats, and some broke our hearts by losing or by lying. Instead of cool, is he just effete? Does he intend to lead us, or confront us?

Of course, spin can go either way, but the candidates' actual achievements and demeanor since January bear close consideration.

Before reaching any final conclusion, let's also give the candidates' resumes and biographies one last look. What do their lifelong histories show us in terms of values and priorities and possible predictors of presidential success?

Hillary Clinton: Traditional upbringing in comfortable, conventional, suburban, Republican middle-American family. A mixture of public and elite private schooling. Fast rise and key alliances in Washington as young government lawyer in the anti-war, post-Watergate days. Bill Clinton's wife. Corporate lawyer in the South. Wal-Mart board member. Twenty years as First Lady in Arkansas and U.S., with a mix of achievements (advocating for education and children) and failures (health care reform). Scandal-tested due to Bill's adultery. Survived and learned from Ken Starr and Karl Rove. Successful as center-right Senator in right-leaning, GOP-dominated Congress.

Barack Obama: Untraditional middle-class upbringing in unconventional family and far-flung locales. Biracial, single mom, absent African father, raised in teen years by Midwestern white grandparents. Mixture of public, parochial, and elite private schooling. Stood out as exceptional at Harvard Law and thus voted president of the Harvard Law Review. Chose career as grassroots organizer, helping displaced steelworkers and mobilizing church and community activists. Put down roots on Chicago's economically and racially diverse South Side, joining a church and marrying into a solid and conventional black family. Taught the Constitution and represented a liberal, urban district in state politics before running for the US Senate. As Senator, started cautiously and helped on bipartisan efforts.

How these contrasting histories and recent performances get weighted will depend on each judge's own values and goals. But there's enough to judge by.

Undeclared superdelegates and the remaining undecided voters need to choose now.

They need to block out the spin and politics and judge which candidate's narrative rings truer, which fits these times, which person has demonstrated the right values, which person can best reverse the Bush legacy of mistaken strategies and misguided ideology. They need to judge which one can lead us as a people and help shape the world.

The Democratic primary is not a board game or sport or entertainment or a test for pundits.

Democrats should wait no longer, or the Republicans will choose for us. Democrats have to pick one.

And come November, Americans will have a new leader.

* * *

Superdelegates who haven't committed to a candidate*

(*Contact them. And please comment below.)

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS

Technorati Tags:

Sad and Pathetic

The really sad thing is that Hillary is very intelligent. In many ways, she runs circles around her Senatorial collegues as well as her husband. However, instead of using her brains for the better, she has chosen to run a demeaning, belittling and dirty campaign against a member of her own party! What the heck! It's obvious that she's in this for herself and doesn't care who she runs over to get to the White House. That's one quality I won't tolerate in my president. Obama is equally intelligent. His quiet and introspective manner may be confused by some as "not being strong", but he certainly is! Strength isn't judged by who has the biggest mouth or is willing to go to war at the drop of a hat. Strength comes from within by using common sense, intelligence and a willingness to negociate. Obama has these qualities which is why I think he would make a GREAT president. For those who question which one will help the lower and middle class the best, take a look at what each of them did after graduating from Harvard Law School: Hillary went on to sit on the board of Wal Mart while Obama went into the inner-city to help the less fortionate. Hillary will throw us some crumbs while in the White House. Obama will offer us a hand up in the world. There's a big difference.

Obama and Electability

I've been pondering the argument about Obama's weakness in the general election, and frankly, it's crap. My analysis of primary election data shows the following UNDISPUTED FACTS:

--- In the 28 states that held both Republican and Democratic primaries (not caucuses), nearly twice as many Dems as Reps voted (27,371,217 vs. 14,617,247) and 26 of these primaries occurred on or BEFORE McCain clinched his nomination on March 4.

--- Dems outvoted Reps in 25 of the 28 primaries (exceptions: Alaska, Arizona, and Utah)

--- Over all 28 states, Obama received twice as many votes as McCain (13,502,540 vs. 6,797,249) and nearly as many votes as ALL THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES COMBINED (Obama: 13,502,540 vs. ALL REPS 14,617,247)

--- Adding together the votes from the so-called "big states" of Illinois, NY, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and California, Obama received MORE TOTAL VOTES than ALL REPUBLICAN CANDIDATES COMBINED

....................................... OBAMA ...... ALL REP CANDIDATES

ILLINOIS*........................1,301,954........... 885,009

NEW YORK*....................... 697,914........... 602,747

OHIO............................... 979,025........ 1,010,864

PENNSYLVANIA* ............. .1,045,910.......... 807,122

TEXAS*........................... 1,358,785......... 1,320,653

CALIFORNIA......................1,890,026......... 2,514,047

...................... TOTAL .... 7,273,614......... 7,140,442

* Individual "big states" (4 of 6) in which Obama received more votes than ALL REP CANDIDATES COMBINED.

Conclusion: While there may be good reasons (or not) to choose Clinton over Obama, Clinton's so-called "electability"/Obama's "weakness" is not one of them. Based on my analysis of the numbers of actual voters who turned out, it's clear that Obama CAN'T LOSE unless Clinton somehow implodes the party completely.

Data Source: CNN Election Central. Numbers subject to changes as states update their results.

Let's Make Lemonade

With this historic stalemate that's being played out, let's take the time to consider not having the superdelegates commit now. If they all go uncommitted into the convention they can propose the one and only candidate who will for sure win - Al Gore for President with Obama as his Vice President.

Before you dismiss it out of hand, just consider, is anyone else in the USA more qualified to turn this country around than Al?

But what do I know - I'm just

The Old Hippy

Al Gore?...

You might be on to something. Maybe the superdelegates should continue to cool their jets for the time being - maybe even until the 2nd ballot at the convention... Just before the Pennsylvania primary, Andy Ostroy said it well... read it here:

Andy Ostroy: Are the Democrats Impoding? Can Al Gore be Far Behind?

...Have to admit, Gore-Obama has a nice ring to it...

Al Gore!!

I must admit I got the idea from Andy but it needs to be pushed

The Old Hippy

HOPE

Obama ····· some

Clinton ····· little

McCain ····· none

Vote your mood

Don't Blow It by Prolonging It

Clinton has thrown the kitchen sink at Obama with many accusations being real stretches like guilt by association, lack of experience, and unelectability. It would bode her well to examine her own guilt by association, her real experience, and her own electability, all of which are open to critical vetting (and will be if she is nominated). This is not inclusive of her blatant lies about dodging bullets in Bosnia on multiple occasions. She has lost the trust of this voter and 60% of all voters. Her dirty politics have fooled some of those who have not allowed themselves to critically look at her character. I was a Clinton admirer at one time, but their questionable, almost Rove like, less than honest tactics have convinced me that the White House would be better occupied by Obama. Add to this the damage being done to the Dem chances in the Nov elections by prolonging the primaries and stirring dirt, and we may have McCain in the White House. Not good for the Dems or the country. End this potential trainwreck. Dems have historically shot themselves in the foot and snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Obama is a once in a generation candidate. Don't blow it by prolonging it.