So, a lot has happened since my last post. Let's recap, shall we?
* I'll start with the Republicans, cos they're easy: John McCain will be the GOP's presidential nominee. To steal a line from Colbert, Huckabee may have "majored in miracles," but he apparently failed math. Getting the magic number is only a technicality for McCain. Not bad for a guy who was being left for dead (uh, politically-speaking, that is) a short eight or nine months ago.
How'd he pull this Lazarus routine off? Well, it certainly didn't hurt that his main rival could be described with such great accuracy in this Daily Show send-off. (I found the bit particularly amusing because I had used that exact same epithet to describe Romney only hours before when one of my co-workers told me he was withdrawing: "Good," said I, "that guy's a total ******-***" (or something to that effect)). Not sure why the Huckster didn't do better, but I guess I'm starting to realize that what the average conservative wants is a guy who's basically a complete corporate tool but can also sprinkle some biblical references into his speechifying (apparently, the Huckster didn't fit the bill sufficiently on the first score). Yes, as I read one conservative type saying, Bush was a good candidate cos he was Romney and Huckabee all rolled into one. Sounds like a nightmare to scare Frankenstein to me, but I reckon that is just the sort of jackass who really rallies the righties. Alas, the Decider hisself can only grace us with his glorious leadership for two terms (oh, what a sad day it will be when they put him out to pasture)...
In any case, the torch has been passed to fightin' Johnny McCain.
* But who will his opponent be? Well, after Super Tuesday, there was some wacky spin coming from the Clintonistas that she had done well, crows that Obama's "Obamentum" hadn't really done what was expected, but I, for one, never bought it. Sure, he didn't take California, for example, but for him to have basically managed a draw with the woman who had been the presumptive front-runner at least until Iowa, and then regained that mantle, arguably, after New Hampshire...well, they just couldn't spin that as a good omen for her (or rather, they could, but their jollity seemed a bit forced, to say the least).
Especially with the schedule showing such a good February for Obama. And danged if he and his campaign haven't made the most of it. 10 and 0, particularly with yet another lopsided loss in Wisconsin last night, in which H.C.'s base seemed to increasingly take to the new guy, and it is utterly reasonable to say she's in tremendous trouble. Can you count her out, yet? Nah, that'd be stupid after all the wackiness that's gone on this campaign season, but if I understand the delegate math very well, it sounds to me like she'd need to have the sort of blowouts Obama's been racking up recently to even pull even in the delegate race, and given that her wins have typically been much closer than his, it just seems really, really unlikely that she'll pull that off. Sure, she *might* win Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, but even if she does, it's sounds like it will be extremely difficult for her to make up the delegate gap.
And, whoever has the pledged delegate lead when the dust settles will, I think, be the Democratic nominee. Could the so-called super delegates effectively override the will of the voters and hand the nomination to Clinton if she comes in with fewer pledged delegates? Sure, but besides being patently anti-democratic, it would be incredibly stupid in terms of the chances of beating McCain. Have the Dems been incredibly stupid in the past? Sure, so I guess anything's possible, but I don't think even they are dumb enough as a group to try something like that. Besides, Obama (short of donning a turban and converting to Islam) is obviously the stronger general election candidate, so I think that'll make things pretty easy for 'em, should it come to that.
As it is, I wouldn't be surpised if Obama doesn't take one of those big three states and open up a delegate lead big enough to make it pretty much a moot question. (I.e., it's one thing if he's only ahead by a few delegates, but if he stays up by a couple hundred, it's even harder to imagine the super delegates trying to steal it.)
* So, let's just say it's Obama v. McCain in the general. Well, first of all, I'd have to say that after eight years of Bush, it might seem like the electoral Moirae are finally smiling on us. Well, at least on me, anyway, since that was the combo I was hopin' for.
So, I then have to wonder if things will go completely as I'd like and Obama (the least of all the potential evils, in my estimation) will win in November.
Well, with the caveat that a whole lotta stuff could happen in the next eight or so months, I'd say at this point that it would definitely look like his race to lose. Sure, there's the fact that he's half black, the fiction that he's a Muslim, the "naive" tag, but Democratic voters, for the most part, at least, haven't seemed to take the bait. Will Republicans and independents be more susceptible to such "arguments"? Perhaps, but plenty of them seem to be voting for him in these primaries, so it's doesn't seem right to think they'd abandon him en masse in the general.
And as for the Muslim trick and similar lies, those should provide an interesting test for McCain, actually. Having been burned himself by such scrofulous stuff by the Bushies in 2000, he will probably be given the opportunity at some point to take the high road and call those lies what they are. Will he do the straight-talkin' thing and speak the truth, even if condemning the lies might be politically inexpedient? Or will he act like Bush with the Swiftboaters, vaguely pooh-poohing "outside groups" while clearly hopin' that their lies help him win?
Well, either way, again, I think the younger, charismatic, potential "first ever" candidate has a basic advantage over the old white guy, even if the latter is fairly likable as politicians go. Sure, lots of things could change the calculus. If al-Qaeda attacks in the US again, if Obama is caught in a truly unambiguous case of plagiarism or dirty-dealing with some idicted supporter...then sure, maybe people go with the "safe" choice, the "authentic" war hero.
But, absent some major game-changing event, or a big blunder on Obama's part, I'd put money on him beating McCain come November. I'd estimate by 5 to 10 percent, in fact, since I'm busy prognosticatin'...
Well, we'll see. He's still gotta get by Hillary first.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment