I'll have a full wrap-up of today's Potomac Primary festivities tomorrow, but here's a report on an interesting Repub voting strategy. I have a first hand account of a Repub voter crossing over (which you can do in the Commonwealth) and pulling the lever for...Clinton. That's right. Feeling good about a McCain victory, some Virginia Repubs are intentially voting for Clinton to help her win the nomination. They see her as a galvanizing force for the GOP in the general.
Now, we've all been hearing the whispers that this is how Repubs feel. And I was also hearing that Repubs might try to influence the election by voting for Clinton. But now that I know that someone actually did it, I'm not really surprised. The fact is, virtually everyone feels that this is a crucially important election. There are divisions and animosities in our politics that run deep. Everyone's looking for an edge. Yesterday, I had lunch with a New York Democrat who hates the whole field in the race. He was a Giuliani supporter. As a financial guy, he sees Democratic ecomomic proposals as socialism; as a Jew, he thinks Republicans are not confronting the threat of Islamic Jihad that exist in places like Saudi Arabia and the UAE; and as a global businessman, he thinks both parties are underestimating the market impact China and India present to the rest of the world.
The fact is, it's tough to have true crossover appeal these days. Obama may have some--I have spoken to three Repubs who say they would vote for him--but he's still a tough pill for any but moderate conservatives to swallow. McCain has a whole slice of the Republican party screaming for his head. The only unified group is Hillary Haters.
And this brings us to one macro point: As Barack Obama correctly points out, President Clinton created a positive record of prosperity for the country, but left a negative legacy for the Democratic Party that resulted in George Bush. George Bush has also created a negative legacy for the Republicans that they are battling against in this election.
So here's today's question: Who is the candidate that can stem that pattern of polarization. Or is it even possible?
The NY Times has a revealing profile of Obama dealing with race and a terrific op-ed piece by David Brooks on the "reality" that a possible Democratic Administration will have to confront. Check them both out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/opinion/12brooks.html?ref=opinion
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/12/us/politics/12obama.html?hp
Leave a comment by clicking on 'comments', by pass the Google sign-up and hitting the 'nickname' or 'anonymous' button.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
For the first time in a generation, the Democrats have cultivated candidates who truly represent the needs of the people and aren't afraid to speak up: Universal, single payer health care, a living wage for low and middle income families, a woman's right to choose, a couple's right to marry, a plan to get us out of this immoral war...!
It's bad enough that I'm forced, along with so many other proud liberals, to cast my vote based on "Who can win?" Who can beat the Right-Wing Republican machine?" Now, we're trying to outwit these nitwits hell bent on 'playing' the system?
Is this the price of Democracy?
Post a Comment