This Democratic race is going strange...

Isn't that it though? The "not tough enough on Hillary" angle is exactly the position news people on TV are taking. Before the last debate all the pundits were agreeing that Obama had to attack Clinton publicly and with some vigor. The printed press media's opinion is unfortunately irrelevant here, you know because they are all liberals and everything. =) It might sound weird, but Axelrod is just telling it like it is.

They are at a loss for any other reason, where to me at least, its obvious that Americans are just simply comfortable going back to ANOTHER Clinton. Hereditary political leadership is live and well. Take that Robspierre!!!

Clinton vs. Guiliani 2008. It cannot get much worse than this.

I don’t really see what you are on about. There are many reasons why all kinds of fractions would want to see the Obama camp get tough with Clinton. First of all, his campaign this far has been in the spirit of those vintage GWB lines of ‘we need a uniter, not a divider’, and this makes any attack smacking ever so little of mudslinging perilous to him (but yum-yum for the punditocracy, naturally), especially since the Iowa voters supposedly frown upon such behaviour. Secondly, the Republicans welcome any internecine rumpus in the Democratic party, for obvious reasons. Thirdly, amongst the Democrat grass roots, many are longing for someone beside Edwards really to start questioning Clinton’s track-record on everything from her mealy-mouthed stance(s) on Iraq (past and present) to her all too cozy relationship with big business — to name just two of the question marks surrounding her. (Incidentally, the other candidates have only addressed the heredity question you mention in very veiled terms so far, so that’s another issue bound to get some venting sometime soon. Another issue is her still abysmal standing with right-leaning and centrist voters [much worse than Obama’s].) Finally, if Obama keeps lagging in the polls, he has little choice but to have a go at the top dog. If he doesn’t reach that conclusion himself, his supporters will force him to.

baboon2004 said:

Shit, i was just talking about 60s funk pioneer Axelrod going political... It just struck me as a very uncommon name...perhaps it's not...

Click to expand...

Hahahahahah....

There was a pretty informative Meet The Press on last night... Bill Clinton in the first half (response to dynasty question: "She shouldn't be judged on the fact that she happens to be my wife" )

Barack is coasting right now, but he's actually doing well in Iowa. The conventional wisdom from the pundits (and dammit if Pat Buchanan, asshole that he is, doesn't know some shit about running campaigns) is that Hilary is most vulnerable in Iowa, but will take NH handily. Obama's only chance is to take Iowa and get momentum from that. Edwards doesn't have the power to go all the way, maybe he's just jockeying for another VP slot. I can't stand that guy, every time he opens his mouth it's like he's talking to 9-year-olds.

Of course, if "electability" comes up, Hils as the most mainstream, most status quo candidate will get a boost.

Giuliani will NOT get the Repub nomination. He is too weird, too liberal, too Italian/Catholic, too NYC. I'm convinced most of the hype is from NYC-based media organizations not realizing that the heartland doesn't get on board their quirky fascist mayor train with the gusto that they once did. Most Republicans still have no fucking idea what to do, I'm guessing a lot will stay home in '08.

Gavin said:

Of course, if "electability" comes up, Hils as the most mainstream, most status quo candidate will get a boost.

Click to expand...

Perhaps, but it depends on if you by ‘electability’ mean ‘experienced enough to be a wise and steadfast leader in times of great uncertainty’ (Hillary — yes; Obama — maybe), or, if you by ‘electability’ mean ‘doing well in head-to-head polls versus the various Republican candidates’ (Hillary — not really; Obama — yes). (I’m only thinking of the national polls I have seen here. If anyone knows of any specific to Iowa and New Hampshire, I would very much like to be pointed towards them.)

The head to head thing was a major factor in John Kerry’s being nominated, you remember.

It's a good name.

You think? I think it’s bland as cucumber.

Barack Obama's chief Stategist branded 'a cucumber' by Dissensus' Guybrush.

"It's a racial slur and typical of these people", said Axelrod, co-owner of the world's most LA name.

Axelrod dude!

Ahh, I knew I recognised it from somewhere.

Guybrush said:

Perhaps, but it depends on if you by ‘electability’ mean ‘experienced enough to be a wise and steadfast leader in times of great uncertainty’ (Hillary — yes; Obama — maybe), or, if you by ‘electability’ mean ‘doing well in head-to-head polls versus the various Republican candidates’ (Hillary — not really; Obama — yes). (I’m only thinking of the national polls I have seen here. If anyone knows of any specific to Iowa and New Hampshire, I would very much like to be pointed towards them.)

Click to expand...

"wise and steadfast" - She couldn't even say who she would root for if the World Series is Cubs vs Yankees (not that the Cubs will make it)!

I always interpreted electability to mean "seems most presidential, I guess." You make a good point though.

The polls were on MTP, had Obama about even with Hilary. These numbers have Hilary further ahead. Of course this is 90% idle speculation/drumming up ratings with a horserace before anything can really be determined.

Here's another article: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/2008_democratic_presidential_primary

Giuliani will NOT get the Repub nomination. He is too weird, too liberal, too Italian/Catholic, too NYC.

Click to expand...

I hope you're right, as I'm convinced he'll win top job if he gets the nomination. Maybe as a Brit my perspective is distorted, but it seems hard to believe the three things he's chiefly known for (dragging the Mafia to jail, zero tolerance and 'America's Mayor') won't be enough to outweigh his NY liberal negatives with the Republican base.

I'm very dubious that Hillary can win. She's hated by many and from what i've seen is a truly lousy public speaker (two things that apply equally to Bush, I know, but he had that "aw shucks" shit that seems like money in the electoral bank over there)

Yeah I noticed the Axelrod thing last year. Sorry for missing that.

Before I go any further, can I just ask, anyone that is reading this thread, have you, or anyone you know, responded to a "political poll"?

crackerjack said:

I'm very dubious that Hillary can win. She's hated by many and from what i've seen is a truly lousy public speaker (two things that apply equally to Bush, I know, but he had that "aw shucks" shit that seems like money in the electoral bank over there)

Click to expand...

Awww, give Dubya a break - he's not one of them Harvard-edjikated egg-heads, he's Just A Regular Guy Like You An' Me.