Don’t underestimate the ability of the electorate to make the wrong vote.
Clinton was elected twice, and he was an empty suit compared to HW Bush and Dole.
Obama is smooth and uses inspirational (albeit empty) language. There is also a certain inevitability factor to the first serious black presidential candidate.
I’m not saying I agree that Obama is the better candidate; but, nor will I hide my head in the sand about his strengths as a ‘rat candidate.
what is the difference this time ?????
and it is a biggy
ain’t no hangrenade w/ a bad haircut
Agree absolutely. When Obama speaks in hopeful and soaring terms addressing themes that transcend racial and economic and political division, he taps into strains of hope that cut across the full political spectrum, with skills not seen since Ronald Reagan and Martin Luther King. Although I know his mis-guided world and economic views are as wrong-headed as Jimmy Carter's, his communication talents are awesome, and should never be underestimated or discounted. He would be a formidable nominee.
Yes, but never forget that Ross Perot was the most successful (almost) 3rd party candidate ever. He really hurt Bush. In fact, he killed him the first time.
Clinton would never have been elected without Perot.
He was motitivated by hatred of Bush senior. I never knew what it was, but recent speculation was that it had to do with Viet Nam prisoners and a fight about getting them out/or not.