Letters to the Editor
debaser
Published Letters: 656 Editor's Choice: 11
-
careful wes
[Read the article: Hillary Clinton's long strange journey on Iraq]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]keep up this texas talk and we're going to start thinking you're a N.E.R........
-
with all due respect
[Read the article: Would Americans elect a woman president?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]the respondents to this poll weren't answering in the abstract here. Their answers were, for better or for worse, influenced by both Obama and Clinton.
I'd be interested to see if there was a follow up question asking which of those two they'd rather see elected. This could very well be simply a reflection on each candidate's popularity.
cheers
-
BFD
[Read the article: The GOP attack plan for Barack Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]For every time they bring up Wright, we show the "bomb bomb bomb Iran" clip.
For every time they say he's too liberal, we say McCain is running for Bush's third term.
For every time they say he's too young and inexperienced, we hammer home the point that McCain's 73.
For every time they highlight McCain's trump card, that he's a war hero, we highlight Obama's - speeches in front of tens of thousands of people.
they think they can just say "boogidee boogidee boo!" again and everyone will jump in line...
Dare I say it - Not This Time!!
-
a bit off topic
[Read the article: Would Americans elect a woman president?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]but another way that this election is unique is that for the first time in forever a sitting senator will be president. When was the last time that happened?
actually does anybody know?
Bush - Gov
Clinton - Gov
Bush the 1st - Vice President
Reagan - Gov
Carter - Gov
and things get murky for me...
Ford wasn't elected right?
Nixon - wasn't anything before election right?
LBJ - Vice President
do we have to go back to Kennedy??
-
@Malthust
[Read the article: The GOP attack plan for Barack Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I agree with you completely. One other thing to remember, the GOP slime machine only works in conjunction with their ability to get out the vote. This time there's one ace in the hole for the dems - the republican base doesn't like McCain, he's not one of them...he's not an evangelical. Sure the regular voters will come out - but I think they'll be hard-pressed to rally the evangelicals who aren't so politically active as they have the last two election cycles. Does anybody remember the numbers of people polled who voted for Bush solely because he was "a man of God"? I can't recall, but i seem to remember it being quite high.
(and I'm not totally convinced by the "hillary will mobilize them" argument - sure it will for a portion of the base...but not enough to off-set the general sweep left-wards that I suspect the electorate is undergoing)
in short, this election campaign will signal the death-knell of Rovian Politics!
-
@dkmoorhead
[Read the article: Would Americans elect a woman president?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks for the info.
what's always kinda surprised me is that members of The House don't ever seem to make it very far in presidential campaigns (i'm hedging here b/c I can't actually recall any house member ever even being nominated...and I'm too lazy to look it up :)
I remember reading a great article in Harper's a few years back calling for the dismantling of the senate, one of the many reasons was that the House was MUCH more representative of the American electorate (way more women, visible minorities etc etc). What is it about the American imagination that deems members of the House of Representatives unworthy of executive office?
I realize this is waaay off topic, but in my head I can see some connections - namely I don't think the question is whether Americans are willing to elect women, they do quite well in the House right? But rather it's a quirk of the voter psyche that seems to favour Governors (and there's 50 every 4 years to vie for the role of President)...I'm sure someone else could make a more eloquent post about this...it's just not in me today ;)
-
@kilroy was here
[Read the article: The GOP attack plan for Barack Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I see where you're coming from re: one day primaries. It would solve alot of problems.
Thing is, I think it would add some problems as well. For one thing it would further exacerbate the issue of needing gobs of money to run for President (an issue I think is of real concern) and would effectively shut out smaller candidates from the process. For example, there's no way Huckabee would've gotten as far as he did without the focus on smaller states first (not that I agree with his policies, but I think it's healthy for these types of candidates to be part of the process). Also I think it would favour the more populous areas over the more rural (where the delegates are). I can see the argument for that being a good thing - but I also think spreading them out allows for the concerns of all regions to be aired.
I'm sure there's more, but I can't think of them so close to lunch on an empty stomach.
I guess my point is - the current system ain't great, but the alternative isn't perfect either...kinda like everything political!
cheers
-
re: The Huckabee statement
[Read the article: The GOP attack plan for Barack Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ya know, despite all of his nutty ideas, I always got the impression that he's basically a decent human being.
I still think the GOP shot themselves in the foot by not nominating that guy - despite his more nutty policy statements (like scrapping the IRS?!) I think an affable evangelical was their only hope to win this time 'round.
-
@RealityCounts
[Read the article: The GOP attack plan for Barack Obama]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't know how much faith we can put in the efficacy of the Limbaugh Bully Pulpit anymore.
I mean he and his ilk were screaming on high trying to get anyone buy McCain nominated (remember Coulter saying she'd vote for Clinton over McCain?) and we all know how that turned out.
(i for one have never really bought into the "republicans are lousing up the open primaries" argument - I think it requires a very large number of people willing to actually give up their time in front of American Idol in order to be at all successful. Numbers that I just don't think bear out. I mean, have you ever tried to rig an online popularity contest? It's damn hard.)
I'm still predicting that Obama has tapped into a zeitgeist here with "not this time"...