Obamarama

Patrick Nielsen Hayden explains why he voted for Obama in the primary (he did it by absentee ballot). Key graphs:

I’m for Obama knowing perfectly well that, as Bill Clinton suggested, it’s a “roll of the dice”. A roll of the dice for Democrats, for progressives, for those of us who’ve fought so hard against the right-wing frames that Obama sometimes (sometimes craftily, sometimes naively) deploys. Because I think a Hillary Clinton candidacy will be another game of inches, yielding—at best—another four or eight years of knifework in the dark. Because I think an Obama candidacy might actually shake up the whole gameboard, energize good people, create room and space for real change.

Because he seems to know something extraordinarily important, something so frequently missing from progressive politics in this country, in this time: how to hearten people. Because when I watch him speak, I see fearful people becoming brave.

I’ve noted before that I’m not voting for presidential candidates in the upcoming Ohio primary because I’m registered independent and it’s a closed primary, but if I were, I suspect I would probably end up voting for Obama myself. I’d do it for some of the reasons Patrick notes, and also because I think he has a chance to be a generational candidate — someone who will bring new voters into the process. If this ends up a contest between Obama and McCain (and it’s pretty clear McCain is going to be the Republican choice, which is a whole box of irony that I will unpack some other time), this election has the potential to go down as one of those watershed elections in American history, something that hasn’t happened since Reagan. I could stand a bit of watershed at this point in time.

That said, as Patrick notes, there are worse things than Hillary Clinton. A friend of mine who is voting for her today in a primary was grousing to me last night that Clinton isn’t getting much of a fair shake in the media, which clearly seems to loathe her and which also has a swoon going on for Obama. This is a fair complaint, but it’s also worth noting that life isn’t fair, and that little fact has worked for Clinton in the past; I don’t doubt she could have had a fine political career if she’d never met Bill Clinton, but the fact she did has worked considerably to her benefit to date. Now she has to deal with the downside of all that.

And yes, that does work in Obama’s favor. I mean, Hell. Personally I’d love not to give Fox News a frothy-mouthed gimme for the next 4 to 8 years, and yeah, I’m philosophically inclined against presidential dynasties (look what the last one got us). But as I’ve mentioned before I do think the GOP funamentally fears a Clinton candidacy, because the Clinton crew is the only one on the Democrat side that is fundamentally unafraid of the GOP smear machine; they hit back, and they hit below the belt. Like it or not, that does have value, or will, when we get into the thick of the actual presidential campaign.

I don’t think today is going to be the end of either Obama or Clinton; the race is too close and the Democrats in their wisdom generally portion out delegates proportionally rather than winner-take-all in each state; I suspect at the end of the evening, they’ll both still be in the running. I’m fine with this; it’ll give the folks in my state the feeling that their primary votes will mean something when they vote in March. I do think at this point momentum is with Obama. The longer the race goes, the more likely it is he’ll be the one to finish it.

58 thoughts on “Obamarama

  1. I’m wholeheartedly supporting Obama, and I’m even a woman! ;) One reason, but only one of many, is that after living in this Pittsburgh neighborhood for 8 years and never talking to my neighbors, I’ve been motivated to start knocking on their doors to meet them and talk about Obama. I think PNH states it perfectly by saying Obama makes the fearful brave, because that’s me in a nutshell. And that’s just the icing on the cake, because I do believe from his experience (OMG yes, he actually has some, and it’s good too!), his legislative record and his writings that he could be a great president.

  2. On the downside of an Obama win, we may have to look forward to four years of increasingly desperate news-headline puns:

    OBAMA CATCHES OSAMA
    OBAMA HONORS VET’S MAMA
    OBAMA IN 24-HOUR DRAMA
    IN FASHION: THE OBAMA PAJAMA

    And so on and so on…

  3. I’m also an independent; not officially registered as one (and don’t know if that’s possible here in Minnesota) so won’t participate in tonight’s caucus. Back in college I worked on the John Anderson campaign (anybody remember him?), and have worked on campaigns I believed in since then, despite the fact that I have become disgusted with the whole policical process in the last 20 years or so. I have even written in “none of the above” on occasions where I felt that none of the candidates deserved my vote.

    That being said, I will probably vote for Obama if he becomes the Democratic nominee, because I believe he’s the best option available. Not perfect, but perfection is not required. And I’m less concerned than Patrick about his being a part of the political elite. I’m hard-pressed to see how anyone these days can not be and still get elected to a major office. Yes, the Clintons know how fight back against (and even use) smear campaigns, and failure in this area certainly cost Kerry the election. But I’m sick to death of negative campaigns and smear campaigns and all the associated crap that goes with it. You CAN fight them without becoming them.

    At one time in the distant past I would have considered McCain, but he has devolved over the years. Sad.

    Even more sad is I know some people who are frustrated with the whole political process, especially as played out in the last two elections, and are choosing to sit this one out. I understand their frustration; I don’t understand their decision. If you won’t participate, you have no right to complain about the process or the results, and you stand zero chance of making any change.

  4. Have you seen this link?

    Andy Olmsted

    It’s from the Obsidian Wings site that Patrick links to, and is about the story one of the bloggers there who gave his life for the country.

    Not strictly relevant to this, but I wondered if you had seen it; the post itself is patriotic without being political.

    Slightly more on-topic, what did you think about Edwards?

  5. That ability to hearten people is why I currently want Obama to win so much. Hillary might be an incredibly clear public speaker, but she hasn’t been able to convince me of anything yet. Obama most certainly has.

  6. I do agree with you, John. By the time we hold our primaries the presidential candidates will probably have been decided. Which is why I’m independent but registered Republican. Before you froth at the mouth, hear me out: I live in a very red area. Most local Democratic elections are uncontested in the primaries. I figure if anyone has a chance at getting some of our long in the tooth political types out of office, it’s a strong Republican contender – one who isn’t a flaming right wingnut. Politics are shifting ever so slowly leftward here, but it’s the Republicans who will rule, at least for another four years (and I’m still talking locally).

    I figure any chance I have to vote the idiots out of office is better spent at the Republican primary than casting a vote for a lone Democrat. I have this strange, idealistic notion that I’d like my vote to count for something.

    Besides, then I get to have a good laugh over the fundraising material the Republicans send to my house. Makes for great blog fodder. ;-)

  7. McCain vs. Obama will give us a choice between an older version of Politics as Usual, which was a little bit better than the current version (kind of like abandoning Vista to go back to XP), or the chance to invent a whole new Politics as Usual.

  8. I voted for Obama this morning. All I want is a President who can say “nuclear” properly. Is that too much to ask?

  9. I voted for Obama this morning. All I want is a President who can say “nuclear” properly. Is that too much to ask?

    I watched part of the last Obama-Clinton debate, and thought, wow, two candidates who speak in complete sentences. Complete paragraphs, even. With trains of thought that don’t leap onto different sets of tracks.

  10. John sez:

    But as I’ve mentioned before I do think the GOP funamentally fears a Clinton candidacy, because the Clinton crew is the only one on the Democrat side that is fundamentally unafraid of the GOP smear machine; they hit back, and they hit below the belt.

    I’m curious to hear your opinion on the GOP candidates’ constitutions toward the Democrats’ smear machine/methods/entity/whatever (Romney might be out of the running, but I’m still curious). Also, is it such a given that the GOP will initiate the smears? I’m no political analyst, to be sure, but the implication that Dems (or perhaps, to be specific, the Clinton(s)) only ever ‘hit back’, and never ‘hit first’, seems a bit…specious, to me.

    Glad to hear ZT finished well, looking forward to reading it!

  11. Obama gives people hope, because both he and some of his people discovered that oratory (as compared to speech making) is still a viable form of powerful communication.

  12. Here is a 20-minute or so discussion by Lawrence Lessig on why he’s for Obama. It brings up some really excellent points that Clinton supporters should think about: http://lessig.org/blog/2008/02/20_minutes_or_so_on_why_i_am_4.html

    Yeah, 20 minutes is a long time, but this is an important issue, so if you’ve not yet voted, please check this out.

    In related news, if you’re in the great state of Washington, please note that the voting in the primary this year does NOTHING to decide Democratic delegates – you must vote in the CAUCUS this saturday if you want your vote to count towards selecting the Democratic nominee.

  13. If I may be so bold as to “net it out.”

    Obama appeals to idealists. Clinton appeals to cynics. Interestingly many cynics started out as idealists.

    For me I am not voting in the primary but will vote for the Democrat who gets the nomination.

    And at my core I am a cynic. I have seen too much proof of the where the power really is and how little power the American people currently have to think that even a brilliant politician can create a radical change.

    The politicians are not the problem, thus a new politician cannot fix the problem.

    But as they say “Hope springs eternal.” Or, as Little Sally says in “Urinetown: This may not be a happy musical, but it is still a musical. And in a musical where a little girl like me can have so many lines anything can happen.”

  14. I think this was the first time in sixteen years where I felt good about my votes, that I was marking a ballot for someone rather than against.

    Democrats ’08: A Return to Complete Sentences and Proper Grammar.

  15. John Scalzi:

    I’d do it for some of the reasons Patrick notes, and also because I think he has a chance to be a generational candidate — someone who will bring new voters into the process.

    Actually, I think the writer’s strike is responsible for the new voters. It’s turning out to be the best Reality TV since American Idol.

    And there’s nothing else to watch….

    Personally I’d love not to give Fox News a frothy-mouthed gimme for the next 4 to 8 years

    But….but….in Novemeber of 2006 you were all for divided government.

    Or was you jus’ talkin’ trash to get us to vote for Democrats?

  16. Frank, you brought up the divided government thing on an earlier thread and I answered it there. Short form: Just because I think divided government is a generally good thing doesn’t mean I abandon sense and vote for who I think is an inferior candidate for president.

  17. is Clinton looking at Obama’s butt in that picture?
    that bluish white glowball in front of Obama looks like a ghost- orb!
    (or just a light in the background)

    I seriously think that Obama would be the better choice because it
    would seriously give the GOP-candidate a much harder target to
    fight against. And I believe Obama seriously wants to get people to work together on issues, rather than pandering politics like Karl Rove’s made to divide and get people all riled up like a wasp nest hit with rocks

  18. Insane Lab Rat,

    I have no doubt that Obama seriously wants to get people to work together on the issues, unlike, say, someone who claimed to be a “Uniter not a divider.”

    But my cynical self doubts that he (or anyone at this time) could pull it off. I’d love to be proven wrong.

  19. I think Fox News will foam rabidly at the mouth regardless of whether we elect Clinton or Obama. So that argument doesn’t wash with me.
    (However, I will be happy with either one of them.)

    Right now, I just hope that who ever becomes the Democratic nominee isn’t so beaten up by the process that he or she is easy pickings for the Republicans in the general election.

  20. John Chu, but with Clinton we’d get to see (albeit on a different network, but I think Hannity might follow suit) Chris Matthews’ head explode.

    It might be fun just to see that on uTube.

  21. A divided government is one thing, but 4 more years of essentially the same foreign policy is a global disaster in the making. McCain is no different than Bush on foreign policy. And he’s not differnt enough on domestic policy.

  22. My wife and I went to the Obama rally on Saturday in Minneapolis. I was an Edwards supporter, my wife was for Kucinich. We’re going to caucus for Obama (and Al Franken) tonight. I believe now.

    Not a shameless plug but I did write a post about the rally on my Live Journal. Just go to my site and click on the Live Journal. Again, no intention to plug, I just don’t want to fill up Scalzi’s yard with my meanderings about the rally.

  23. John, Julie has the right idea: even if you’re an independent, register in one of the parties so you can vote in the primaries.

    While I’m a Democrat, I think that registering Republican and helping pull that party out of its ultra-conservative morass is a noble thing to do. (I hesitated when typing “ultra-conservative,” because it’s not quite the right word for a party that is fiscally irresponsible and hell-bent on tearing up the Constitution for scratch paper. I’m not sure there is a word that encompasses the mass of contradictions that is today’s Republican Party, although farblunged comes close .)

  24. Vince O’Connor @ 6. I remember John Anderson, but only because my dad was a huge supporter.

    I hesitate to say I’m an Obama supporter only because the last two candidates in the primary process I supported were Richardson and Edwards. That didn’t work out so well for them, and obviously it must’ve been my fault. Over the last few weeks, as I’ve really had a chance to see what Obama stands for, and just think about who I want to see in office, I’ve fallen more steadily into the Barack camp. Not as my first choice like I mentioned above, but as a solid backup choice. His stance on undoing the Constitutional abuse of the last 8 years was really one of the main points of decision for me.

    I like the headline potential of “Barack and a hard place”

  25. “…because the Clinton crew is the only one on the Democrat side that is fundamentally unafraid of the GOP smear machine; they hit back, and they hit below the belt”

    Because if there’s one thing Chicago politics is historically famous for, it’s those cleanly-fought, above-board, gentlemanly campaigns they have up there.

    It’s been said before, but it deserves to be said again: the only real reason for thinking the Clinton campaign is “tougher” is because we’ve seen them do it. I don’t think there’s any reason to assume that because Obama comes across as nicer than the Clintons, he can’t fight back against a smear machine or is more susceptible to it. And what I read from people who are more familiar with Obama’s career as a campaigner tends to bear that out. The nearest thing to a plausible argument against Obama along those lines is the contention that the Clintons’ dirty laundry is so well-aired that there’s no news, so surprises and no interest in it anymore. I don’t really buy that argument (“I have so much scandal I’m scandalproof”? Really?), but okay.

    A little digging suggests Obama has a much more effective legislative record and a much tougher campaign record than he’s often getting credit for. I have no doubt he can take whatever his opponents want to dish out, and there are indications he can take it without losing his class or much of his cool. Honestly, I’m more worried about the Clintons getting bogged down in old news than I am about Obama’s capacity to take a punch. But what do I know?

  26. The joke is that people actually think candidates like Obama, propped up the mainstream media and CFR, really represent “change”.

    The only true representative of change is Ron Paul, who owes no one any favors (except for American citizens).

    Of course, at this point, I’m hoping for “anyone but McCain.” But I think it’s delusional to pin one’s hopes on someone like Obama, though of course he or Hillary will be the lesser of two evils versus John McCain. And for so-called conservatives, either Obama or Hillary are actually more conservative than Juan McCain.

  27. Making people brave and speechifyin’ is all well and good, but I kinda want more talk on the issues. You know, war, health care, recession, unemployment, foreign policy, etc. along with some possible solutions/ideas. I want substance, damn it!
    :)

  28. Johh says:

    “I’ve noted before that I’m not voting for presidential candidates in the upcoming Ohio primary because I’m registered independent and it’s a closed primary, but if I were, I suspect I would probably end up voting for Obama myself. ”

    Even though the Ohio primary is closed, which means you can only vote for candidates in one party, that does not mean you can’t vote for Obama. The official rule is:

    Party Affiliation (primary only): No matter what party affiliation you may have used in a previous year, you may now choose a Democratic, Republican, or unaffiliated ballot. If using a different affiliation than previously, you might need to sign a form to this effect. You will be free to make a different choice in subsequent elections.

    So go ahead and vote!

  29. Bob @28: “Neoconservative” is a generally accepted term; “faux conservative” seems to me to describe the bunch of crooks better.

    Chris D @31: If you’re counting candidates still in, there are none who are truly independent. R*n P**l owes a great deal of his support to some of the most right-wing, racist organizations out there. (More to the point, evidence suggests he shares their views, rather than using them the way Karl Rove used churches.)

    The candidate who was not beholden was John Edwards, whose financing was essentially out of his own pocket. His suspending his candidacy was the saddest day in US politics since the SCOTUS awarded GWB the keys to the vaults and the nuclear launch button.

    I’m reluctantly supporting Obama (given the choice between him and Hillary) because I think he’s marginally better overall and clearly superior on specific issues I care about, like understanding and preserving the US Constitution, and technology issues.

  30. Bruce, policies of liberty and freedom happen to open up a pretty big tent, so obviously his message has attracted all different kinds of folks. As for evidence that Paul shares those views of his more radical supporters, only the far left neocon/liberals would be naive enough to believe the New Republic’s smear campaign. To imply that Ron Paul owes some kind of favors to such people is even more out there.

    I’ll watch the political charade being played out, and I may even vote for Hillary or Obama in the general election (to keep radical McCain out of office), but in no way will I think I’m voting for any kind of real change. This is business as usual, no matter what kind of packaging it’s wrapped up in.

  31. Oh, and I also had to ask myself “who would Robert Heinlein vote for?” (being a big SF fan) I think the obvious answer would be the candidate who promotes freedom and personal responsibility over big government and foreign intervention: Ron Paul.

  32. Second order effects are always interesting. That is, what happens after what happens, happens?

    Assume Obama is elected. The next thing that happens is a matchup for world championship with Putin. This echoes the matchup between JFK and Krushchev.

    When Ted Kennedy endorsed Obama he aluded to Truman’s criticism of JFK that he was too inexperienced. Ted thinks Truman was wrong. I think Truman was right.

    Khrushchev started to push against Kennedy almost immediately. The most serious items were approving the Berlin wall and nuclear missiles stationed in Cuba. There were a number of serious provocations against Kennedy that Khruschev would never have tried against Eisenhower. (Proof being he didn’t.)

    I don’t like the odds of matching Obama, who seems less than JFK, against Putin, who seems more than Khrushchev.

  33. ChrisD @36/37: I have trouble believing that the preponderance of evidence as presented so far is a “smear campaign”; those, like the Swift Boaters, tend to rely on implication, innuendo, and, specifically, lack of evidence. But thanks for suggesting I’m naive; we ancient and decrepit cynics like to be thought of as failed optimists rather than hardbitten realists every so often.

    Although I am as serious a fan of the Admiral as anyone, I don’t have the hubris to suggest that I’d know how he would think or vote. But again, thanks for the thought.

  34. Careful: referencing a “Ron Paul/Robert Heinlein” nexis might draw the Ayn Rand nutjob from last year, like a shark to chum.

  35. Buck: Nah, I banned that twit. He still occasionally tries to write a comment, though. I don’t think he quite understands than “banned” means “you don’t get to play here anymore.”

  36. In the last Democratic debate, a 38 year-old mentioned how as long as she’s been voting, there’s been a Clinton or Bush not only on the ballot, but in the White House. Which seemed pretty poignant to me.

    I’d vote for Clinton if she was the Democratic candidate, but I voted for Obama this morning, because I would like to see someone people (including myself) believe in and I think he can bring some change. Although after watching that debate, I thought an Obama/Clinton ticket would really kick ass.

  37. Putting every other consideration aside, I think there are a whole lot of people who will vote for Obama facing any Republican. I think there are a whole lot of people who will vote against Clinton facing any Republican.*

    I want a Democrat in the White House and I’d like to stack the deck, if possible.

    *I spoke to Kurt Vonnegut’s ghost and he agrees.

  38. Scalzi sez:
    I’ve noted before that I’m not voting for presidential candidates in the upcoming Ohio primary because I’m registered independent and it’s a closed primary, but if I were, I suspect I would probably end up voting for Obama myself.

    I’m not sure if the reason you’re not voting for candidates is that you think you can’t change your status from independent (actually “unaffiliated”) to Democrat (or Republican, for that matter), or if you just don’t want to be identified with either of the major parties.

    In Ohio Primaries, when you show up at the polls, or request an absentee ballot, after giving your name and address, you are asked which ballot you wish to be given. Your choices are 1) Democrat and Issues, 2) Republican and Issues or 3) Non-Partisan or Issues only. If you choose 3), you are given a ballot which contains only ballot issues (usually school tax levies and such). If you choose differently than you did two years previously, you might be given a silly form to sign, which simply states that you wish to change your affiliation.

    It should be noted that your choice of ballot type is recorded by your county’s Board of Elections and noted on voter registration lists that are provided on request to the parties and, I believe, ballot-qualified candidates. I don’t know for sure, but they may be provided to polling organizations and 527s as well. This may result in, among other things, mail from candidates and and sample ballots from parties showing up in your mail if you (or Krissy) are on record as being affiliated with either party.

    At any rate, if you don’t want to be identified with either of the major parties that’s fine — I can think of good reasons not to want to be. I just hope that you realize that you have the option of changing your status on March 4th.

  39. “ChrisD @36/37: I have trouble believing that the preponderance of evidence as presented so far is a “smear campaign”; those, like the Swift Boaters, tend to rely on implication, innuendo, and, specifically, lack of evidence. But thanks for suggesting I’m naive; we ancient and decrepit cynics like to be thought of as failed optimists rather than hardbitten realists every so often.”

    Bruce, first off my apologies if you thought I was referring. to you specifically as naive. I wasn’t. My point was/is that anyone who threatens the status quo will have to endure the usual smear-by-assocation rather than being attacked on the actual issues. Those charges against Paul had been addressed many times over a year in advance of the N.H. primaries. But it’s not like the guy is going to win anyway, though I think at one time, before Iowa and N.H. when RP was gaining real momentum and raising buckoo bucks there was real hope for real change; I certainly don’t see that in Obama. Being the best panderer and having the right appearance won’t necessarily result in us electing the best leader. But at least he’s a competent speaker, and that much will be a huge relief over the last seven years.

  40. Nathan @ 43 – Polling data, for what it’s worth, support your conclusion. In a McCain v. Clinton race, independents go to McCain. But in a McCain v. Obama race, the independents split.

    And I had the same reaction to the debate as DKT. In those instances where Clinton and Obama talked about what they have in common in contrast to McCain, I thought it was very persuasive. I don’t imagine we’ll see that ticket, so I am hoping a little bit for Obama/Richardson.

  41. As soon as I post this I’m going to vote for Obama in the CA primary. Then I’m going to Obama HQ in Pasadena to volunteer to help today, and throughout the campaign.

    There are a number of reasons I’m voting for Obama, and PNH put it more eloquently than I could, so I won’t list them here. Though I like to think I’m voting for a candidate I believe in (and, I am,) there is also one very important politically strategic reason to vote for him.

    I want a Democrat in the White House.

    There are plenty of Republicans and independents who aren’t fans of McCain and will stay home in November rather than go out to vote for him…as long as they’re also disinterested in the opposition. Many of those same voters will race to the polls for a chance to vote against Hillary Clinton.

  42. “There are plenty of Republicans and independents who aren’t fans of McCain and will stay home in November rather than go out to vote for him…as long as they’re also disinterested in the opposition. Many of those same voters will race to the polls for a chance to vote against Hillary Clinton.”

    Yup, I don’t think a lot of people get it. Conservatives hate McCain with a passion. And all it will take is for a third party candidate who contrasts him/herself with McCain on one or two major issues, like immigration, and the GOP is sunk for 2008. But I still think they’re sunk if McCain gets the nod because GOP voters are at the point where they can’t hold their nose anymore and vote for someone they find unacceptable. Which is fine by me, I’m just saying that McCain isn’t the threat the pundits on CNN or MSNBC would like folks to believe.

  43. 46/47: I would agree with an Obama/Richardson ticket except for one thing. While I love Richardson’s committment to energy and environmental issues, I can’t support someone who has come out for the line-item veto. After Bush, I just can’t see the benefit of giving the executive branch that much power.

  44. “The only true representative of change is Ron Paul, who owes no one any favors (except for American Confederate citizens).”

    Just had to make one small fix.

  45. Listening to NPR, and reading wikipedia, it looks like Obama has 7 and Clinton has 6 states at this point, but Clinton has some of the more populous ones (NY, NJ, MA)…

    Utah, and Connecticut will probably go Obama too.

    California still hasn’t finished voting, so it’s still up in the air.

    In short, still close.

  46. I had the same curiousity as hugh57. Are you not requesting a Democratic ballot just because you don’t want to be identifed with a party?

    I’m also an independent, but was planning to get a Democratic ballot this year so that I could vote for Obama. I’m assuming I can change back to independent next time there’s an opportunity. I suppose I may get fundraising calls but I get those now.

    Is there some reason (other than a purely philisophical one) to not do this? Wondering if I’m missing something…

  47. DKT,

    In the last Democratic debate, a 38 year-old mentioned how as long as she’s been voting, there’s been a Clinton or Bush not only on the ballot, but in the White House. Which seemed pretty poignant to me.

    Poignant, maybe, but nearly as shallow as voting for or against “Dick and Bush” because they sound like a pron movie.

    Bush has incredible negatives at the moment and the attempt to tie the Clinton marriage to the actual Bush three generation dynasty is a nasty ploy, especially because it seems to work on some people.

    Doesn’t it seem convenient that we are suddenly concerned with “dynasties” when it hurts a Democrat? Where was all this talk when George III was ascending the throne?

  48. Poignant *and* shallow? I’m a regular 31 Flavors!

    And no, I was far more against voting for Bush 2.0. I’m not against voting for Clinton, I’d just prefer someone different.

  49. Check the detailed rules in the Ohio primary. Here in Utah, both primaries were closed, but the republican one was more closed. The unaffiliated, like you and me, could vote in the democratic primary without losing that status. The republican party required that the independent voter sign an affiliation form before voting in theirs. These rules were decreed by the parties, so perhaps there may be a similar difference in Ohio or elsewhere.

    I was and still am unaffiliated, but voted for Obama.

  50. >McCain vs. Obama will give us a choice between an older version of Politics as Usual, which was a little bit better than the current version (kind of like abandoning Vista to go back to XP), or the chance to invent a whole new Politics as Usual.

    Isn’t it a little like Mac vs. PC?

    I voted for Obama, but I cheered when Hillary Clinton said she wouldn’t allow her campaign to be swiftboated.

    Because she totally wouldn’t. She’s punch those asshats in the heart.

This is the place where you leave the things you think

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s