Letters to the Editor
ShawnWM
Published Letters: 1029 Editor's Choice: 4
-
@Tom - 1 of 2
[Read the article: Obama, Clinton and the black-brown divide]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You make some points with which I agree- for instance, that the fascisti will spend megabucks driving Obama's negatives up.
It's all they have and they do it so well. And unfortunately Obama has material to work with. His being ethnic and having Muslim family may excite liberals, but it will also incite the Republican populist voters at least so much as HRC would have.
the balance to that argument is that ms. Clinton's negatives are already in the high forties.
maybe so. But it is impt. to note she won over solidly republican and hostile areas of NY. regardless of what her neg ratings are, the point is that the repugs have done what they can do to them. You have to have faith they can't do worse to Obama than the high forties and that he can handle it when they toss it at him, and that's where we differ a little.
Remember that Mrs. Clinton has had to fight the left AND the right in this primary. Until TX, she played softball on him and so did they because she was trying not to set the left off too much. IMO, it didn't work, she couldn't stop the left from their invective fury anyway she came at him a lot harder in TX and OH. still only been a fraction of as hard on him as the rightwing will be; we all know that.
So, it's a matter of some concern if he can withstand what they'll throw at him. We don't know that. I sure don't.
We're both biased to some point, but again, I note that HRC HAS stood up to the right before and beat 'em each time. Will he be able to? I don't know either.
What I do now is how he has responded to the things the Clintons, with two decades of national experience, have confronted him with.
well, he really hasn't. when she finally hit him with that in OH and TX he lost big despite outspending her either 2:1 or 3:1 depending on who you listen to. Remember the GOP will outspend him 2 or 3 to 1, especially as so many of their states as you point out,won't be in play. disadvantage the dems always have.
The republikans stumbled into nominating the one candidate that will be hard to beat.
Yes, but I'm not as certain that they just stumbled into it. Their strategists are the best there is. They understand they've been on a losing trend in the west and had to nominate someone who could reverse that AND someone who could appeal to hispanics (translation: had stayed out of the antiimmigration demogoguery).
Odd, but, I would opine, undeniably true. No scenario I can imagine would have Honest John taking NY or California.
I don't know. If hispanics transfer their support from Hillary to John McCain, a native of Arizona, which they well forseeably could. If independents go overwhelmingly for McCain which they quite conceivably could given his (IMO unjustified) perception as a maverick unwilling to cowtow to the right wing of the party... If Asians transfer their loyalty from HRC to McCain, which is certainly plausible and if enough HRC supporters are irked enough to stay home... California and NY for that matter could well be in-play. I hope not, but it's not implausible.