Saturday, February 2, 2008
Inspiring Ads
Hillary Best To Beat McCain Says Penn
Based on recent polls, there is nothing to support Sen. Obama's arguments about his prospective performance against Sen. McCain - both Sen. Obama and Hillary start off within the margin of error against Sen. McCain. Yesterday's Fox poll showed both in a statistical tie with Sen. McCain. And Hillary's negatives are fully factored in, whereas the same cannot be said of Sen. Obama because he is - by his own admission - not as well known.
Sen. Obama's support among independents comes from Democratic-leaning independents, voters who are likely to back the eventual Democratic nominee. He has no overall advantage in the polls against Sen. McCain. But such voters have very little information about Sen. Obama. And once the Republican machine begins to methodically attack him, he will lose independent support.
So in a head to head against Sen. McCain, Sen. Obama has no advantage with swing voters. The 2004 election was determined by two key groups - women concerned about security and Latinos - and against Sen. McCain those groups could again prove decisive. President Bush won 40 percent of the Latino vote in 2004 and Sen. McCain, unlike other Republicans, has been supportive of immigration reform. These are two groups that enthusiastically support Hillary.
As voters look to the future, they will be looking at who can put the country on the right path and who can defend it against future threats. While Hillary is seen as strong on defense and has served on the Armed Services Committee, Sen. Obama has limited experience on these national security issues that would again be front and center.
So if Sen. McCain is the nominee, Hillary is the one well-positioned to beat him. Already well vetted, she is ready to stand up to Sen. McCain on national security and put together a winning coalition of voters that will take back the White House."
Denver Post Endorses Clinton
But as important as that symbolism is, Democrats have an even greater responsibility: to pick the most qualified candidate to lead America at a time when it faces great challenges at home and abroad.
Measured by her long record in public life and her thoughtful proposals to deal with America's most pressing problems, The Post believes that candidate is New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.
We chose Clinton despite our high regard for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, whose eloquence and vision lured young voters and independents into Democratic contests in record numbers in Iowa and South Carolina. Clinton has similarly shown a powerful appeal to women and Latinos in New Hampshire, Nevada, and Florida.
The difference between the two candidates is that Obama's eloquence is not matched by his achievements in the mere three years he has spent in the U.S. Senate. In contrast, Clinton's long record in public life shows her well prepared to deal with two of America's greatest challenges: ending the war in Iraq and solving our health insurance crisis.
The two Democratic candidates share some commonalities. Both seek to end the war in Iraq, recast the American economy to better serve poor and middle-class citizens, begin dealing with climate change, rein in the runaway budget deficits of the Bush administration and restore America's standing in the world. But while they share a common vision of America's future, Clinton is more likely to forge that vision into real progress.
America must seek a swift end to the war in Iraq. But our precipitous withdrawal in 1975 from an unpopular war in Vietnam led to executions and mass imprisonments of Vietnamese who had fought on our side of the war and a desperate exodus of refugee "boat people." We must end this war honorably, without betraying the brave Iraqi voters who proudly waved their ink-stained fingers to show their faith in America's promises to the tender mercies of al-Qaeda torturers.
Clinton is well prepared to oversee a careful disengagement from Iraq and to serve as the military and diplomatic leader of the free world. She served with distinction on the Senate Armed Services Committee, where she mastered the intricate details of national and international security. Obama has no comparable experience on military or diplomatic issues.
If Iraq is America's most pressing foreign issue, health care is our most serious domestic problem. Clinton led the ill-starred 1993 fight for health care reform. She learned from her past mistakes and was a key architect of the successful Children's Health Insurance Program. Now, Clinton's plan for universal health insurance is far more comprehensive than the hit-and-miss proposal put forward by Obama.
Obama has criticized Clinton's health care plan because it requires citizens to buy coverage while subsidizing low-income workers. But Obama's voluntary plan simply won't work, any more than a voluntary Social Security plan could work. By allowing seemingly healthy people to avoid buying insurance, Obama would simply saddle the taxpayers with the costs of their care if and when they are stricken by such catastrophic illnesses as cancer.
We genuinely admire both these candidates and confess we'd like to see them team up in Denver in a Clinton/Obama ticket. Marrying Hillary Clinton's proven record of performance with Barack Obama's uplifting vision would truly make history for the Democratic Party — and possibly for America as a whole."