Just a few of my thoughts on this Valentine's Day concerning the world of politics:
Scared?
The above video is an ad that the Clinton campaign is currently airing in Wisconsin, which holds its primary this coming Tuesday. And while many have criticized this ad as negative, and Obama himself has dismissed it as "the politics of the past", it does raise important questions. There was a scheduled debate in Wisconsin in which Sen. Clinton agreed to take part in; Obama did not. Here's the problem I have with Obama on this issue---Obama consistently says there have been enough debates and there need be no more. I disagree. There has only been one other debate with Clinton and Obama facing each other one-on-one. Americans still do not know where Obama stands in contrast to Clinton on the key problems facing our country. There are policy differences and the people of Wisconsin, and America, deserve to know these issues in order to cast an informed vote. As far as I'm concerned, as long as there are issues, there can never be enough debates. And with the stakes this high, and the problems this deep, there needs to be more debates.
New Mexico Finally Decided
A week and half after Super Tuesday, we finally know the winner in the New Mexico caucus---Sen. Hillary Clinton, who defeated Barack Obama by just 1.1%. How important is this? Probably not much, because no matter who won, both would and will split the delegates just about even. But what it does show is that Clinton can win in caucus states. They're certainly not her strong-suit, considering they disenfranchise voters and, in my opinion are completely undemocratic, but she did win and that says something. With the Texas primary being part caucus-esque, is this a foreshadowing of things to come on March 4? We'll just have to wait and see.
Texas and Ohio
And speaking of Texas and Ohio....they are shaping up to be the decisive battleground for the Democratic nomination. Obama is, without a doubt, the frontrunner, but with two wins in these states, Clinton can make a comeback. It's hard to be a frontrunner when you can't win the two biggest states after nearly a month of being the frontrunner, in every sense of the word. That's why it's equally important that Obama do well here as well. How do I see these contests shaping up? Hard to say just yet, but I'm sure both will be extremely close. Ohio is probably a better state for Clinton. She does, after all, have the support of the very popular governor, Ted Strickland, and former Senator John Glenn. Texas will be tougher. As I mentioned, the part of the primary that is similar to a caucus (Texas has a very complicated process), will heavily favor Obama. Texas also has, surprisingly, a high number of African American voters, who usually outweigh the Latinos. Both are doable for both Clinton and Obama. But, as of right now, Clinton has the edge in Ohio, while Obama has the edge in Texas.
A Fair Point to Make
Hillary Clinton has been ratcheting up the contrasts between herself and Obama. She has rightfully pointed out that talk does not equal action. Rhetoric does not equal solutions. It's one thing to inspire hope; it's another to bring bring it about. These are all fair criticisms of Obama. And what is really telling is when you question voters and Obama supporters on what exactly are Obama's accomplishments. For example, about a week ago there was a segment on television in which Obama supporters were asked to name a single Obama accomplishment or achievement. No one, not one, could name a single accomplishment. Today on Hardball, Wisconsin governor and Obama-backer, Jim Doyle, was asked what has Obama has done to help Wisconsin. He literally was dumbfounded and, in essence, said that he wasn't sure. What has Hillary done for Wisconsin? She worked with Ted Kennedy to get thousands of kids health insurance. She reached across the isle and worked with Republicans to get health care for thousands of Reserves and National Guard troops in Wisconsin. I like and respect Sen. Obama, and would surely support him over McCain, but these are real questions Americans need to ask themselves. We are, after all, electing a President, a Commander-in-Chief. Accomplishments and records do matter.
Strength to Fight the Tough Fight?
Does Obama have it? Some think so, but maybe he doesn't. It appears that in the Senate, Obama continually watered down an important bill until the special interests got their way. The New York Times reports:
"A close look at the path his legislation took tells a very different story. While he initially fought to advance his bill, even holding up a presidential nomination to try to force a hearing on it, Mr. Obama eventually rewrote it to reflect changes sought by Senate Republicans, Exelon and nuclear regulators. The new bill removed language mandating prompt reporting and simply offered guidance to regulators, whom it charged with addressing the issue of unreported leaks.
…“Senator Obama’s staff was sending us copies of the bill to review, and we could see it weakening with each successive draft,” said Joe Cosgrove, a park district director in Will County, Ill., where low-level radioactive runoff had turned up in groundwater. “The teeth were just taken out of it.”
… The campaign acknowledged that Exelon executives had met with Mr. Obama’s staff about the bill…"
I encourage you to read this very interesting article, here.
