14 February 2008

Barack W. Reagan

I was going to post something about the presidential race a few days ago, but I got distracted. I'm sure you don't mind. I certainly don't.

So the DC/VA/MD area had their elections this past Tuesday with McCain and Obama winning by a hefty margin. Good for them. I've been giving considerable thought to Obama over the past couple of weeks and this is what I've concluded about him: he could be the Democrats' Reagan. Reagan was a conservative, no question. However, he had the ability to attract voters from both sides of the spectrum and everyone in between, and in record numbers at that. Obama is a liberal, no question. What I'm seeing thus far is that he also has the ability to attract voters from both sides, despite his left-leanings. Compare that with Hillary, who is by her very nature a divisive personality. Many Democrats love her, or at least think she would be effective. On the other hand, Republicans DESPISE her. While she is partly to blame, her husband is in many ways to blame for this as well. Now, he wasn't the worst president we've ever had; that honor still belongs to the Republicans as far as I can tell. At least when Bill was president he had slightly more tact and a diplomatic enough way about him. Lately, he's just turned into a complete hoser. We've all known that he was capable of whopper-sized lies, but he's really outdone himself in his efforts to "help" his wife. The lies aren't even well-veiled anymore, they are out-and-out BALD-FACED LIES. And they are so obvious that he isn't fooling a single person on this earth except himself. All supposedly for the benefit of his spouse. She continues to assert that we are voting for her, not him, but how stupid does she think the voting public is? We are putting Bill back in the White House, period. His presidency had been far enough removed so that most of us remembered that we perhaps weren't fond of him, but we couldn't exactly recall why; it was all kinda hazy and we began to think that perhaps we had judged him too harshly. His coming out for Hillary's campaign has vividly sparked our memories ("Oh yeah, now I remember. He's a douchebag.") and made us hate her by association. If Hillary wins the nomination, Republicans will come out in DROVES to keep her and Bill from being elected. Whether they like McCain or not, they will vote for him just to keep her/them out.


Obama is another story. As liberal as he is, there is something about him that seems to attract conservatives. When I can put a decisive finger on it, I'll let you know. Almost every conservative Republican I've spoken with about this very issue has ranted to the point of frothing at the mouth by the very mention of Hillary. But when a McCain/Obama race is put before them, they indicate that they wouldn't cry themselves to sleep if Obama won over McCain. As in, they'd still be OK with the situation, even though their party's candidate lost. There are exceptions to this naturally (*coughryanncough*), as everyone is different and sees something they like in different candidates. But I still get the feeling that overall, Obama appeals to just about every different kind of group out there. He has a very inclusive personality, possibly leading voters to believe that he will work for them--not just the people who voted for him--even if they don't agree on all the issues. They seem to believe that he will work out issues of difference rather than fight against those who disagree with him. Reagan had that effect on people. Democrats voted for him over their own candidate. And many Republicans, disenchanted or not, will vote for Obama over McCain. If the Democrats really want to win the White House at all costs, they would do well to get Obama in the spot vs. Hillary, because it will ultimately be conservatives who ensure he gets there.


The Husband made a good point about Hillary. She would make a kick-ass Secretary of State. She's nobody's yes-man and no one would be stupid enough to screw with her for fear of losing a vital organ. The president needs people who disagree with him in order to make the best possible decisions--a concept that escaped Bush completely. Hillary would tell the president exactly what he needed to hear, not just what he wanted to hear. She is no pushover. Her powers just need to be guided in the right direction for maximum benefit. Do I think she'd actually take the job? Probably not. I think she'd think it was beneath her. But she'd be excellent, no doubt about that.

8 comments:

Ryann said...

Abby you completely nailed my feelings about Bill and Hillary. I would go out and actively work against them if she were to win the nomination. It amazes me how on the money you are. Maybe you should be a political commentator!

Benteti5 said...

I agree that Hillary vs. McCain would pull Rep. out in droves. I find myself liking Obama too. I think he has charisma and he's wittingly subtle. He'll disagree with you in the same sentence he praises you and you end up with a smile. I guess that's called diplomatic.
Bill has similar qualities, if we can remember back to his earlier presidency years. For a douchebag, he had high public opinion and he was re-elected fairly easily. But now, something is lost, anytime a Clinton opens his/her mouth I just noise. Something about McCain I don't like, though. Can't put my finger on it.

Misty D. said...

If your professors could see you now, they'd be so pleased! You retained some of your college learnins!

And I will do anything I can to keep Bill from running around the White House without anything to do. I mean, holy crap, look at the trouble he got himself into when he was busy!

And I don't believe I've ever seen/heard you use the word douchebag before. It made me snort, and think of this site:

http://arabianmonkey.com/doclothesmakeyouadouchebag.htmlnpiqfec

Abby said...

I think you're one of two people, Ryann, (me being the other) that truly appreciates my political commentary. I think I'd get fired, especially after I insulted a guest or two's lineage. Thanks for the kind words though.

Yeah, I can't put my finger on why McCain has morphed into a creepy man recently, either. I used to LOVE him. Now I feel a bit...suspicious of him I guess. At best. At worst, I think we're making a huge mistake. And it's not even the obvious stuff like his status quo-like approach to immigration--it's something more subtle. Like a feeling like he's Jekyll and Hyde, but we haven't seen the Hyde part yet. It's a tad unsettling. We'll have to be on our toes with this one.

And good point on the Obama thing. He can call you an idiot with such diplomacy and tact so that you thank him for it afterwards. Might be a nice change of pace after the thoroughly tactless Bush.

Hey Misty, that link says it's broken. I'll trust that it was funny. As for my professors (I'll have to write an entry about them one day), they would call me a communist. These are the sort of people who think Glenn Beck is the most brilliant pundit in the media, just because he's far right AND a Mormon (kinda like Romney was the best candidate of all time). Sheesh, every time I hear that guy I want to scream at the TV. Even O'Reilly, who I think is kinda funny (intentionally or not), doesn't rile me as much as that damn fool does. I need to go calm down now.

judiroso said...

Abby, Everytime I read a blog about your political views, I wonder what your views are. It doesn't seem you really like anyone. I must admit that I am one step above ignorant on most political things. However I am definately right of center, but you intrigue me because I never know what/who you will hate.

Abby said...

Hate is such a strong word.

And you're right. In this race, I am beside myself. I have yet to find anyone who fits what I'm looking for in a president. Just when I think I'm on to something, the person in question blows it for me and comes up woefully inadquate for the job. I'm tired of selecting the lesser of two evils. For once I want to be excited about a candidate and I have yet to feel that way about a single person in this race. It bothers me to no small degree. I will not vote for a man simply because we share a party. Such a practice advertises a voter's apathy towards the political system; he might as well just stay home and save us the trouble. When it comes to president, I don't care which party he belongs to as long as he will point the country in the right direction and look out for the best interests of its citizens, not just those who voted for him. A lot goes into finding a man like that, and I just ain't gettin' the vibe yet.

Benteti5 said...

Voting down party lines used to mean something and was legitimate because parties had the same goals in mind. I come from a family of straight ticket voters. Heck, my Uncle's name is Woodrow Wilson and my Dad named after FDR. But nowadays we can't do that. In my opinion declaring oneself as Dem. or Rep. means little. The parties have lost contact with their roots and some of the branches these days are so far away from the tree that I wonder what tree they come from, if any. Maybe they're floating branches, is that case, that's bad news. I too am missing the vibe. I might get a good vibe about a person, but like I say, what people do and who people are are two completely different things and need separating, especially in politics.
Abby, I say you vie for O'Reilly's job. I'd rather listen to you than him.

Abby said...

I'd rather listen to me than him, too. Unfortunately, I'm not an obnoxious ass, or at least not a famous one, so that job's out.