U.S. Presidential Elections 2008

[jbg]

These guys are being totally selfish and short-sighted. They have to know that the repub candidate is going to be using these exact smears against the winning dem candidate during election time. They're only thinking of themselves instead of what's good for their party or even what's good for the country if they are so strongly against the republican ideals.

You've summed up the race better than perhaps any American pundit. Good post.

[BubberMiley]

You've summed up the race better than perhaps any American pundit. Good post.

Other than the fact that Obama hasn't made any smears and Hillary has made very few. If he had, it would be very insightful. The American pundits have been clamoring for a g"glove-dropping showdown" between Obama and Hillary for months, so the first sign of a disagreement will naturally be portrayed as a smearfest. But anybody who has been paying attention to their exchanges on anything other than a superficial level would realize we're being duped to believe it's typical Rove-style dirty politics all over again.

Unfortunately, it's not that exciting.

[jbg]

Unfortunately, it's not that exciting.

I was an enthusiastic supporter of and voter for Bill. Hilary has a definite and serious mean, petty and vindictive streak.

[BC_chick]

Other than the fact that Obama hasn't made any smears and Hillary has made very few. If he had, it would be very insightful. The American pundits have been clamoring for a g"glove-dropping showdown" between Obama and Hillary for months, so the first sign of a disagreement will naturally be portrayed as a smearfest. But anybody who has been paying attention to their exchanges on anything other than a superficial level would realize we're being duped to believe it's typical Rove-style dirty politics all over again.

Unfortunately, it's not that exciting.

I don't know about you, but I'd say things like "I was putting together inner-city programs while you were working on the Walmart Board" is a little bit of a character-assassination. (this was my point raised earlier - that Obama finally resorted to the Clinton-style personal attacks)

As for Rove-style politics, no doubt, I never said anyone is coming even close to that. Rove was the master of dirty politics, he didn't even care if the smears were truthful or not - it's different than what we see here where they're just exploiting the truth.

But it doesn't change the fact that Obama and Clinton are getting personal, as opposed to discussing policy. At least as far as the last debates go. And I'm not repeating what I'm hearing from repub party-hacks, just what I see for myself.

Anyhow, as far as I'm concerned, I think Obama is the only presidential candidate from either party who has an ounce of decency about him. That's why I hate to see him stoop to this level. My only point was that if they want to bring up shady dealings and/or questionable personal ethics of the past, they are being short-sighted....

Don't tell me you don't believe for a second that the clip of the two of making making personal attacks on each other isn't going to be thrown at the winning candidate during election time.

Edited to add - I don't think The Star can be considered "American pundits clamoring for a g'glove-dropping showdown'"....

http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/296217

Yet their Washington correspondent seems to agree it got ugly.

Edited January 26, 2008 by BC_chick

[bush_cheney2004]

....Don't tell me you don't believe for a second that the clip of the two of making making personal attacks on each other isn't going to be thrown at the winning candidate during election time.

It doesn't matter unless their campaigns get the party nomination. That is the short term goal. Winning the general in November will include far "worse" than that. Just ask ex CBS News anchor Dan Rather.

[BC_chick]

That's what made me think of

However, you are right. The remarks now are exactly what the Republicans will use in the national election later on. We saw the same thing in Canada when the Tories used comments in the Liberal leadership convention in their ads against the Liberals in ads in 2007.

Exactly. In fact, CPC footage of the Liberal debates was what triggered my speculation about where the Dem attacks will inevitably lead. Pubs are being smarter about what they say about each other.

[Rue]

I was an enthusiastic supporter of and voter for Bill. Hilary has a definite and serious mean, petty and vindictive streak.

I think JBG, Bill Clinton should have stayed completely out of this. He should have at least had the decency to be quiet. By becoming an active participant he has violated a long standing protocol that former Presidents must stay out of political campaigns and at least remain neutral to the public. By becoming a nasty, partisan shrill for Hilary he has lost a lot of respect and he;s dividing the party and causing a lot of racial tension.

The only one who can benefit from this long term is John McCain. I do think McCain can defeat Hilary but not Obama.

[BC_chick]

It doesn't matter unless their campaigns get the party nomination. That is the short term goal. Winning the general in November will include far "worse" than that. Just ask ex CBS News anchor Dan Rather.

I don't see the Republicans smearing each other so personally.

[bush_cheney2004]

...The only one who can benefit from this long term is John McCain. I do think McCain can defeat Hilary but not Obama.

The Dems would just offer up an Obama-Clinton ticket. The Clinton attack is a strategy to leverage the inevitable issue of race to their advantage in remaining states that don't have a large African American voting block. However, this will backfire if young voters from all demographic groups turn out for Obama, including conservatives who can vote in open primaries.

[bush_cheney2004]

I don't see the Republicans smearing each other so personally.

But they have and will....Romney calling McCain "dishonest" most recently. Spats about McCain's age. They are not insulated from effective attack politics.

[BubberMiley]

I don't know about you, but I'd say things like "I was putting together inner-city programs while you were working on the Walmart Board" is a little bit of a character-assassination. (this was my point raised earlier - that Obama finally resorted to the Clinton-style personal attacks)

It's not character assassination or even a personal attack if it's true, and it is.

[bush_cheney2004]

It's not character assassination or even a personal attack if it's true, and it is.

True...and Obama must respond or he will be a well principled loser. You can't let the opposition define your candidacy. It's standard issue American politics. There is no such thing as the "higher ground", except for losers.

[BC_chick]

It's not character assassination or even a personal attack if it's true, and it is.

I conceded that unlike rove, these guys are exploiting the truth. yHowever, they are attacking each other's character instead of policy.

What Obama is saying to Clinton is that she's a hypocrit who says she cares for the poor, meanwhile she works for organisations which are known to exploit the very people she claims to protect.

Still not a character assassination? Or do you think Obama was implying something different?

[BC_chick]

But they have and will....Romney calling McCain "dishonest" most recently. Spats about McCain's age. They are not insulated from effective attack politics.

Everyone ages, so it's not a character-assassination. The dishonest comment, okay... but I don't know the context in which it was used, so I don't know if it's about McCain's character per se or about a certain claim McCain is making.

[bush_cheney2004]

Everyone ages, so it's not a character-assassination. The dishonest comment, okay... but I don't know the context in which it was used, so I don't know if it's about McCain's character per se or about a certain claim McCain is making.

You don't understand....the "ageism" harkens back to the time of Ronald Reagan's campaign. It is far worse than character "assassination" and strikes at strength and mental faculties. Sometimes I have to remind myself that most Canadians do not have much lasting historical context in these matters. Sending "C" list celeb and TotalGym huckster Chuck Norris after McCain's age was not playing "fair", because we don't play "fair" on either side.

[james rahn]

True...and Obama must respond or he will be a well principled loser. You can't let the opposition define your candidacy. It's standard issue American politics. There is no such thing as the "higher ground", except for losers.

The leader of the free world -- now serving the lowest common denominator!

Very impressive.

Edited January 26, 2008 by james rahn

[bush_cheney2004]

The leader of the free world -- now serving the lowest common denominator!

Very impressive.

Well, we'd let Canada do it, but everyone would just fall asleep.

[Carinthia]

Obama's hit on Hillary regarding Walmart was a great one. I hate what Walmart stands for. With the cost of living going up and up, many of us have no choice but to shop there. The shrinking middle class and those below the poverty line are completely over a barrel. Obama was clearly pointing out that she is all about partisan politics and the status quo. She was born into the upper middle class of yesteryear and has lived a priviliged life since she was a young woman. I believe that she truly has a will in her heart to try to identify with us little people but that is merely an ideology, which she will foresake when push comes to shove. She has demonstrated her ability to do this by (as Obama pointed out), voting for the bankrupcy bill but then she said she hoped it wouldn't come to pass. She stuck with the status quo by voting for the war. She says all the right stuff but she will always cave to the big boys and back up whatever agenda they have. With her at the helm it will be business as usual.

She continually spouts off that she has 35 years of experience over Obama, but what I see when she gives him those looks is, "How dare you upstage me, I am entitiled to this". Gee, I wonder where this sense of entitlement comes from? The Presidency is not handed down as an imperial right, it is earned.

Edited January 26, 2008 by Carinthia

[bush_cheney2004]

...She continually spouts off that she has 35 years of experience over Obama, but what I see when she gives him those looks is, "How dare you upstage me, I am entitiled to this". Gee, I wonder where this sense of entitlement comes from? The Presidency is not handed down as an imperial right, it is earned.

Careful, Her Majesty the Queen of Canada may be reading!

But to your point, the US presidency is fought for with money and attacks more than earned. There will be a victor....a winner in the end.

[james rahn]

Well, we'd let Canada do it, but everyone would just fall asleep.

And put all those US Defense Industry employees out of work? No you wouldn't.

[bush_cheney2004]

And put all those US Defense Industry employees out of work? No you wouldn't.

You mean the ones who work in Canada.....like Raytheon or General Dynamics? Nope.

[Carinthia]

Careful, Her Majesty the Queen of Canada may be reading!

To this I say, read on dear Queen you are not our leader. (unfortunately Harper is).

Edited January 26, 2008 by Carinthia

[james rahn]

You mean the ones who work in Canada.....like Raytheon or General Dynamics? Nope.

They can always work for the Chinese or European market.

Edited January 26, 2008 by james rahn

[bush_cheney2004]

They can always work for the Chinese or European market.

Gosh, I hope so. Just get off the dole.

[bush_cheney2004]

Cool...Senator Obama has won South Carolina's Democratic primary. The Clinton machine will now cue the "southern strategy".