Here is something that I never would have thought of.
The possibility, no the reality, that the Democrat presidential nominee, Sen. Messiah Barack Obama is much more ruthless on the path to power than was Sen. St. Hillary Clinton.
Gary Gross has a fascinating piece on just that thought. And, it is compelling.
What I focus on is the beginning of the post, about the Rudy Giuliani Republican candidacy.
I never really understood how so many conservative Republicans were ready to jump on the Rudy bandwagon. I mean, Rudy was a great mayor of New York City. For New York City, he was like Ronald Reagan. But, for the rest of the United States, he was more like a garden variety moderate Democrat/Republican. And, the thinking among many was that Rudy because of that moderation would somehow be an antidote to St. Hillary.
Well, of course it is a moot point.
But, the ruthlessness with a smile that Sen. Messiah Barack has may wear thin to many voters come election day.
7 comments:
I think that Obama, has people working for him that will do anything legal or otherwise to get their boss elected. Here is a chance to ride the coat tails of the President of the United States, so they think. Obama is just letting these pit bulls loose saying "Don't get caught and put me in a bad light". he never gets his own hands dirty. It seems the closer we get to election day, the more ruthless he becomes. Rudy may not have stood up to this kind of election. I'm sure McCain will find a spot for him.
great post 64. but i am in the camp of though they do share "socialistic" tendencies hillary is worse. because she IS smarter then him and politically would have an edge as well.. the lesser of two evils in obama's case i guess.
It's impossible for a person of sound mind to vote for a Vice Presidential candidate who refuses to give a press conference. I mean, what is this, the Soviet Union?
Hey, dude, my earlier question to you is dangling, unanswered, in a previous thread:
What do you think is McCain's path to 270 EV's? Which states do you think he can he put together to get to the number he needs?
If you can do that with any degree of credibility - you know, basing it on data that actually exists - then perhaps we can get to your own question.
But until then, your own question is moot.
What say you, my friend?
(As for the Obama v. Hillary matter, one of them did win the nomination for a reason, right?)
To answer you Mr. Snarkle. Sen. McCain keeps all the red states. Maybe a flip Iowa for Obama and New Hampshire for McCain. No question the polling shows in many red states Obama ahead, but there was an interesting piece yesterday that showed Sen. Kerry with very similar polling numbers as we see today with Sen. Obama. And we all know how President Kerry worked out. Most polling puts this race within the margin of error, even at the battleground state level. Here is the thing. Polls are totally meaningless. People are the ones to vote. I do not care what a poll says what at this point. I do want to see the trend next weekend, the weekend before the election. Oh, but all those polls in 2004 showed Sen. Kerry ahead. We shall see. BTW, yea, I know there is no Freeway Series this year. Too bad. Angels are a much better team than they showed to Boston.
Hmmmm, so you're betting McCain holds all 2004 Bush states + NH?
If you were in Vegas, you'd probably be able to get better than 1,000 to 1 odds on that scenario.
Right now, Nate Silver (who predicted the Rays would hit 90 wins this year) has McCain holding Bush 2004 states in only 0.18% of last night's simulations (18 times out of 10,000).
And he's got Obama winning NH 93% of the time.
My own money's says Mad Jack will fail to hit 200 EV's.
The Angels don't seem to be able to put together much of a post-season, do they?
I haven't followed the Phillies, but I like the Rays this time around.
The only difference I see is that Obama has only slightly distanced himself from his henchmen, while Hillary was able to keep them in hiding.
I'm not really sure which is worse.
Post a Comment