The Alan Grayson Page

The Anthony Weiner Page

Guest Contributors

Note

  • BN-Politics' administrators respect, but do not necessarily endorse, views expressed by our contributors. Our goal is to get the ideas out there. After that, they're on their own.
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 05/2007

Blog Catalog

  • Liberalism Political Blogs - Blog Catalog Blog Directory

Blogorian!

Blogged


« Vote-Counting Problems in Los Angeles | Main | Will the DNC "broker" a deal between the Two Democratic Combatants? »

February 07, 2008

Comments

cloudy

I, like you, favored Edwards, but being practical realized early on he didn't stand a chance against either Obama or Clinton. I've watched almost every debate and in the end this is what sealed it for me. Though Obama is eloquent and moving when he speaks, his performance in the debates leave me uninspired. Hilary understands policy, she argues remarkably well (even yes, stubbornly). This doesn't always come across as likable, but it does inspire in me a faith that she will fight for what she believes in and largely I stand with her on most of the issues. Obama faltered a lot in the earlier debates, I am also worried than in needing to retain his likability factor he will be unable to get down and dirty and fight for the things that I feel need to be fought for. Also, he doesn't show me he has the depth of policy knowledge that Clinton has. Yes, you can aruge that that is what advisors are for, but I am wary of a President who wins on likability and has adivsor's to see him through his term. Especailly against that boring policy wonk. Wasn't this the GWB argument?

Andy

Are you familiar with Harpr's magazine article
back in November 2006:

"Barack Obama Inc.:
The birth of a Washington machine"
by Ken Silverstein
PUBLISHED November 2006

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2006/11/0081275

Buck Naked Politics

Andy,

no, I hadn't read that article. Thanks for posting the link!

Steve Graff

Despite your troubling details concerning Obama's soiled hands, all three major candidates maintain their purity against evidence to the contrary. I've bought into the allure thing, to some extent, and that's largely because I'm easily swayed by oratorically gifted populists. My pragmatic sense flies out the window. Yet I have to give credit to a candidate who can surround himself with the level of genius and cunning employed by the Obama campaign, that he is able to run circles and more circles around a seemingly dazed and confused old-hat Clinton campaign. I'm thinking--if they can run a national campaign this expertly, maybe they can solve some of our nation's major problems.

The comments to this entry are closed.