I really Haven't weighed in on the race for the nominations. I have been wanting to compile some data about each of the candidates and time has been an enemy lately. A quick summary of what I would place my bets on is this. The presidency is the democrats to win. The only thing they could do to screw that up would be to nominate Hillary Clinton to run against pretty much any republican. The only republican that could have actually lost to Clinton would have been Giulliani. The republicans seem to have dispatched with their weakest link immediately. The democrats are doing the one thing they seem to be good at, screwing up a free lunch.
Briefly, this is my take. There are so many people who still have a gritty taste for the Clintons and what their trailer park antics did to the integrity of the white house in the 90's. against the backdrop of the past 8 years it seems trivial. However, a country hungry for a divergence away from politics as usual has forgiven but not forgotten. The idea that an election of another Clinton would mean a 24 year old person would have lived their entire life under the rule of either a Bush or a Clinton is not appealing. There are many reasons why this is true. many of them are logical and sensible, some just based on a blow job in the oval office. Many former republicans, including myself, voted for George Bush because of the desire to distant ourselves from the antics of the 90's. Most aware people understand that the economic boom of the 90's was in spite of Bill Clinton and not because.
So what does the results all mean? It means that the people who support Hillary are staunch supporters that are sold on the nostalgia of the 90's. The rest of the people voting for the rest of the democratic field are longing for a real, dare I say it, “change” in direction. I do not know a single person who is torn about who is considering different candidates includes Hillary in that consideration. Most of them are selecting the candidate that they feel will beat Hillary. It is my belief that if all of the other candidates dropped out, Barrack would win the nomination hands down. The same could be said about Edwards and maybe even Richardson.
Look between the lines at the poles and see that those voting for Barrak and the less successful candidates you will see that it is the young and normally independent voters. As we look at the results of New Hampshire and ponder what would happen if the winners there were the nominations it would be interesting. First, since most of the country had counted John McCain, I hadn't considered him. He represents the continuation of the Bush foreign policy that is edging us closer to WWIII. If these two were to be the nominees, then a strong independent candidate will emerge. It will certainly be a factor most likely to divide the democrats and have a repeat of the 2000 election where the republicans were able to trick their way into the White House because of the small margin.
Reading between the poles, both states have had a turn out of young and independent voters. People so hungry for change that they put down the remote control, walked away from American Idol, and voted. These individuals are voting overwhelmingly for somebody who has not the normal Washington approach. If the democrats offer only the same old, these voters will at best stay home on election day convinced that either candidate will be equally bad. Who could blame them.
Comments