On One Hand

March 12, 2007

Poll Update: 2008 Democratic Presidential Nominee

Filed under: Uncategorized — ononehand @ 9:02 pm
Tags: , ,

Here’s my new poll for the Democratic Presidential Primary in 2008

In the race for the Democratic nomination for President in 2008, the competition between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama is tightening. I get the sense that college students and young people, who tend to support Obama, are drifting a little toward Clinton’s side, while general Democrats, who lean more toward Hillary, are drifting toward Obama. The result is a close race for both teams. (Click on the “polls” tag, here and at the bottom of this entry, to bring up past Presidential polls on this blog, to see where liberal college students, the main group of voters in my polls, have drifted.)

While this is happening, animosity between the two main candidates is starting to appear, with jabs arising from supporters of each camp toward the leader of other. Openly-gay Hollywood-based political ringleader and billionaire David Geffin, who was once a strong Clinton supporter but now backs Obama, lashed out at the Clintons saying, “all politicians lie,” but that the Clintons do it “so easily.” Meanwhile Al Sharpton, who the media often turns to as a spokesperson for the Black community, voiced concerns about Obama’s candidacy.

People say that Hillary benefits from a vicious battle; she is known for her ability to go negative, while Barack’s strong point is his overwhelming positiveness, and in a bitter campaign, he is forced to abandon his biggest selling-point. My sense is quite the opposite; that if Democrats think very positively toward both Hillary and Obama, Hillary wins.

My reason to think this is the age and electibility of both Hillary and Obama. Hillary will turn 60 in October. She’s not old, as far as politicians go, but if she is not the nominee next year, her presidential hopes will likely fade, and Democrats know it. The idea of having political dynasties of a single family in power, like the Kennedys once had, and presently the Clintons and Bushes fill, is a touchy subject for Americans. But they still like Hillary, and many want to give her a chance; she is the best shot for this generation to have a woman president. Meanwhile Obama is young and charismatic – only 45 – and his age and inexperience are a concern for Democrats. He will still be on the political scene in 20 years, being only 65; Hillary, on the other hand, will be 80. Democrats will view this as Hillary’s chance, and favor her, hoping Obama will be president in future cycles. A Hillary-Obama team will certainly turn heads.

If Republicans arrive with a formidable candidate, Edwards will be the likely benefactor on the Democratic side. While Democrats love the idea of having a woman or a black man as the nominee, Edwards is seen as the “safe” candidate who will most likely win. If they come up with someone unpalatable to mainstream Amercians – like Newt Gingrich – Hillary’s support will probably rise among the Democrats who are concerned about her electability. Gingrich is now known for having affairs and for leaving wives with the new relationship already lined up; in once case, the wife Gingrich left was in the hospital with cancer. Think of this match-up in the general race: Hillary, the victim of adultery, runs against a person who victimized someone else by committing adultery. The same would be true if Giulianni is the Republican candidate, but in this case Obama’s charasmatic Christian faith contrasts with Giulianni’s total lack thereof, and with Giulianni’s unsavory positions toward Evangelical issues (he’s pro-gay rights and pro-abortion), Obama stands a serious chance of picking up votes that usually go Republican.

I like the idea of a Hillary-Obama team, but I’m still wary of who Republicans might choose – if a really likeable candidate emerges, Democrats might be better off with Edwards, who I have no problem with either. But my general feeling is that I’m extremely excited about the Democratic field in general; Hillary and Obama are both exciting assets to the Democratic Party, and Bill Richardson has one of the most brilliant foreign-policy minds I’ve seen in my short life. If Richardson wins, that’s great, but since my suspicion is that he won’t, I absolutely want him representing the United State’s interest in the Presidential cabinet.

Liberals are extremely sentimental toward the idea of diversity and togetherness in soceity. We appreciate Democracy as a truly radical thing, given the whole of human history. But we are sometimes critical toward America, because we see Democracy as a process – not a sustained state – and it needs to move always forward, increasing freedom and raising the celing for those who are traditionally excluded. If you want to make Liberals patriotic and exceedingly pro-American, elect Hillary – the first woman – or Obama – the first non-white person – into the Oval Office. We will be starry-eyed when we talk about our leaders.

Advertisements

2 Comments »

  1. Woe to the person who would answer “other” or “none of the above.”

    Comment by jdhenchman — March 13, 2007 @ 2:52 pm | Reply

    • This is just for Democrats; if I started putting Republicans and Independents up there it would mess it up. I think it’s highly unlikely that the Democratic party will choose one of them during this election cycle.

      Comment by ononehand — March 13, 2007 @ 8:13 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: