Obama: Frontrunner
It looks more and more likely that Barack Obama, the junior Senator from Illinois, will win the Democratic nomination. Yesterday he won both the primaries of Wisconsin and Hawaii, and with great ease at that. He’s also, as Marc noticed several days ago, making inroads in Clinton bulwark Texas. In short, Obamania isn’t going to end any time soon. If I were a betting man I’d put my money on BO.
His victory in Hawaii wasn’t much of a surprise, but what was reasonably surprising is that he truly destroyed Clinton in his native state. He won 75% of the votes against only 24% for Hillary Clinton. The real surprise, or achievement at least, is Obama’s victory in Wisconsin. For a long time Clinton was leading in the polls there, then the two were virtually tied…
But yesterday wasn’t even close: 58% against 41%. Again a crushing defeat for Hillary and a very important victory for Obama. It will, I am sure, create even more momentum.
He’s the favorite now, for good or worse.
One of the reasons that I support Clinton is that she actually has a past of reasonably moderate policies – not in tone admittedly – whereas Obama’s record isn’t moderate at all. Not policy wise at least. His hope and change has always been progressive; very progressive even. I for one believe that records should be taken into account.
Obama’s proposed policies today – the platform on which he is running – may be less liberal than his record, but that does not necessarily tell us all we need to know. No, instead of listening to words I prefer looking at results.
But I am repeating myself. You all know what I think of Obama and you all know that I think that he’s not even remotely a centrist or a moderate. Of course, if he wins the presidential elections, he could very well prove me wrong – and I hope he will – and, if that happens, I will humbly admit that I was wrong. But as it is I don’t think that I’ll be the one who has to take back his words a year or two from now (providing Obama does, indeed, become America’s next president).
One of the upsides of Obama, by the way, is that he’s incredibly popular abroad. I know that Turkey is rooting for him (I’ve also heard Turks call him a former Muslim which gives them the impression that he may understand them somewhat [even though he says he was never a Muslim and there's no use in debating that issue] – and no that’s not meant as a slur, those who interpret it as such show their bias themselves), as are many European, many Arabs, and so on.
In other words, although I don’t think too highly of Obama myself, I do think that America would become more popular at the very moment he wins the elections. And that is, of course, a very good thing.










Interesting though, I just came across this site which ranks the senators according to how ideological their bills are, and they describe Hillary as a ‘radical Democrat’ vs. Obama being a ‘rank and file’ Democrat. I’m not sure how their ranking system works or how accurate it is, and I think this is based on the 110th so if anything it might represent each of them shifting a certain way to shore up a part of their base (Hillary needing to appeal a bit more to the netroots.)
I’ve never really seen much daylight at all between the two of them on issues; both are much too liberal/big govt for me (and honestly, I cant see how anyone who is an American conservative could possibly see it differently- just look at their domestic proposals and the estimated costs, not to mention the intrusiveness of govt that’s inherent in the proposals.) She’s more hawkish, it seems, so I guess I’d put him farther to the left on foreign policy, but that’s about it.
admin: off-topic spam deleted