The Forum > Article Comments > The race to the White House > Comments
The race to the White House : Comments
By Chin Jin, published 5/2/2008If Barack Obama wins the nomination of his party, he will probably lose the general election in November 2008.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
- 3
-
- All
Posted by BBoy, Tuesday, 5 February 2008 1:08:24 PM
| |
*Are Americans ready to have an African American president? I doubt it, the time is not ripe.*
I remind the author that whilst Obama has some African American ancestory, he is not African American. Lev is right, an Obama/Clinton team could work wonders! If Americans elect another republican, then clearly they need more pain to learn... Posted by Yabby, Tuesday, 5 February 2008 2:42:07 PM
| |
Lev
And listen to the whines of 'cheat' when McCain wins. Posted by keith, Tuesday, 5 February 2008 3:02:33 PM
| |
Assuming that Obama becomes the Democrat's presidential nominee, he will lose the election against the Republicans. It's the cultural melting pot of Americans, especially of Asian-Latino-Americans, that will be overwhelmingly the determining factor of who will be the next occupant of the Whitehouse. And the latter group of Americans, not to mention many Caucasians, will not vote at this stage an Afro-American for president.
http://power-politics1.blogspot.com Posted by Themistocles, Tuesday, 5 February 2008 4:41:09 PM
| |
Like I said to the author, themistocles, the polling numbers just don't support your theories. His thesis is essentially the same as yours, and it just doesn't stack up.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Tuesday, 5 February 2008 5:03:39 PM
| |
With the Blacks voting along racial lines it looks like Hillary is not going to make it.
http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/super-duper-tuesday-polls.html Posted by Philip Tang, Wednesday, 6 February 2008 1:38:13 AM
|
I keep hearing this and see no evidence for it whatsoever. Her stint as a presidential spouse may be closer to a VP position than we've seen before in US politics, but it's a long way short of real executive experience. Clinton's major strength is her health care failure experience, but her weaknesses as a leader are generally glossed over. But the fact is she's shown a distinct opportunistic nature, and a paucity of wisdom on both Iraq and Iran. She's also far more establishment in terms of the status quo on campaign finance reform, and is unlikely to chart a more mature position vis-a-vis Israel in foreign policy. Indeed, Clinton is as likely to be an AIPAC apologist as the Bush-Cheney team is... I really don't see where people get this idea that she is some kind of policy powerhouse. If you compare the endorsement and high profile wonks and advisers they come out pretty equal, which is amazing considering how much an advantage she has through the Clinton political machine.