NOTE: Another special Election 2008 edition of our popular Around The Sphere link-fest where we offer readers links to weblogs of differing viewpoints — and give you our comments on some of the political issues raised. This version will only contain election-related links. It will appear several times a week until Election Day.
The Bitter Irony For Hillary Clinton: Taylor Owen at Oxblog (one of TMV’s favorite blogs):
In a sense you have to sympathize with Hillary. She was supposed to be the one who inspired the enthusiasm of Bill’s initial run. She was supposed to be the one who brought in the desired change away from the Bush years. She was supposed to be the one that the left rallied around. She was supposed to be the one that a new generation got excited about. She was supposed to be the one that made history. She was supposed to be the one that became a movement. She was supposed to be the one.
He then offers an incredible new Obama video and adds:
I suppose it’s impossible to predict when a political campaign will/has become a movement. It certainly has that feeling now though, and they must know that this is what they are fighting against. Regardless, it can’t be easy realizing that you may be on the wrong side of history, but increasingly you just get the feeling that the Clintons are getting in the way…
But if you had to place money, and looking at the way American history has ultimately dealt with candidates who aroused the passions and dreams of youth you’d have to say: it’ll be Hillary (rather, The Clintons) in the end. The question then becomes how the Clintons can tap the enthusiasm of Obama supporters. Perfunctory unity will not do. The idea of a Clinton-Obama ticket doesn’t seem that far fetched anymore.
IN FACT ex-Clintonista George Stephanopoulos flatly predicts it WILL happen. Read Newsbusters HERE.
But All Of The Above Is The Conventional (Cynical) Wisdom. Is a huge Obama Tsunami building?
Mitt Romney And Super Tuesday: An original bloggers podcast done by the husband-wife blogging team of Instapundit and Dr. Helen. You can access it HERE. A MUST LISTEN. (Original blog reporting and podcasting = use of blogging’s potential.)
A Flood Of Republican Crossovers? Bring It On! notes:
Not since the days of Ronald Reagan have you seen or heard of so many people that will cross party politics to vote for the opposing political parties candidate. Even on talk radio there are many die hard Republicans that are running for the Democrat side of the possible ticket if McCain wins the Republican nomination for President. What’s intriguing is that they would vote for Barack Obama over McCain if that was the choice they had to face at the voting booth.
Republicans are suffering from the same malaise today that Democrat’s faced in the campaign of Jimmy Carter versus Ronald Reagan. Our entire nation was in a state of depression over the economic status in our lives and the message the Republican Party of hope, unity, and an America that could be proud once more steam rolled with Democrat voters its nominee Ronald Reagan into the White House.
Bring It On! believes Obama could absorb the cross-overs…but Tuesday will tell if Obama can regain the Big Mo some polls suggest is now stalled. Or IS it stalled? Other reports say he’s gathering steam. So don’t bet our house in Vegas on the outcome of Super Tuesday. Will Hillary Clinton and John McCain prevail as is expected? Or will there be an upset (or upsets)?
Also, look for Republicans to regain some of those who stray if Senator Hillary Clinton gets the nomination. This would be partially due to (a) talk radio’s demonization of Mrs. Clinton which continues unabated, (b) the reality of Bill Clinton’s behavior which is a seeming confirmation of some of the things talk radio has said about him over the years — particularly in terms of a character flaw. You don’t raise the race card under ANY rpt ANY circumstances if you are a politician who actually lives the ideals that you mouth.
Even so, GOPers seem angry, split, and “down” — so the election would be the Demmies’ to lose. Which the Demmies have managed to do in several elections that they were supposedly a shoo-in to win. (Are the Democrats’ strategists working hard now to draw up plans on how to lose THIS one?)
Is Obama’s Fiscal Agenda Less Than Prime? DMI blog thinks so.
Obama Gets All The Publicity For Having Passionate Followers but Hillary Clinton has them as well. Tennessee Guerilla Women:
Todd Beeton, of MyDD attended a rally for Hillary Rodham Clinton at Cal State Los Angeles in East LA and provides the following video clips. One is of an insanely long line outside Hillary’s rally. The other gives a hint of the passion that people feel for Hillary.
As Todd notes, “her opponents underestimate the passion people have for her at their peril.”
And her Latino followers even have a take on Obama’s “Yes we can” which is “Yes she can” in Spanish. And, indeed: keep in mind when you read political mainstream and blog reporting that there is a tendency for “high concept” descriptions of candidates. Hillary Clinton’s supporters DO feel very deeply about her and the Clintons in general. It’s a mistake to assume on Super Tuesday that the only people voting for a candidate who they consider exciting and charismatic are Obama fans. That’s why this race increasingly seems like the two silkworms who got into a race…and wound up in a tie (old joke).
Racism Raises Its Head In The GOP: Bill Clinton isn’t the only one running around raising the race card. So are various GOP commentators. Greg Prince:
Meanwhile the [conservative] caucus has taken to calling McCain “Juan” because he’s not ready to draw and quarter all brown people north of the Rio Grande. It’s unfortunate because McCain’s right to be out of step with his comrades on this issue. Fewer things would bring about more economic benefit to the nation, or to the poor worldwide, than freeing up the movement of people across national borders.
Calling McCain “Juan” and in the context in which it is being used smacks of racism. Uh, oh. Now I’ll be referred to as Joe Gandelhombre. Which I will wear like a badge of honor. (You don’t have to agree with McCain’s immigration policy to avoid turning it into something taking a swipe at people’s ethnicity. And anyone who has lived in California has many wonderful experiences — and friendships — with people whose names might be Juan. Or IRVING for that matter..)
In Fairness To Bill Clinton He Has Also Gotten A Bum Rap From The Media: Read this.
Should Liberals Fear A McCain Candidacy? Liberal Oasis says no.
The Word “Liberal” Is Now Considered The Kiss Of Political Death By Some but is it shifting? Is the same thing happening to the word “conservative?”
Political Scientist Steven Taylor Has Some Thoughts On That, Too. He writes:
At a minimum I think that “conservative” is currently used by many in the chattering class (e.g., Limbaugh, Hannity, Levin, Hewitt, the NROites and so forth) as more of a slogan than as a descriptor of a coherent philosophical position. Further, I think that the War on Terror and the whole post-9/11 period (Iraq included) has substantially mutated what many think a “conservative” to be (including the the afore mentioned commentators).
The term “conservative” has always been somewhat amorphous in US political discourse (as has “liberal”) but lately it seems to be going through a period a redefinition. Either that, or it simply means: “a conservative is someone who agrees with me” (and that changes, of course, depending on who is speaking).
Read his entire post. ALERT: Taylor is one of the most clinical political analysts on the Internet. He is REQUIRED READING for political junkies, bloggers and media types. You heard it here at TMV (and Uncle Joe does not misdirect his beloved readers).
UPDATE:
Are Conservatives Now The Minority? In a related — and also MUST READ IN FULL — post, James Joyner looks at where conservatism is today. He examines in detail the intriguing situation where many hard-core conservatives now favor former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney yet voters in Republican primaries increasingly favor McCain. Here’s just a tiny taste of what Joyner writes;
The Conservative Movement has morphed from a handful of intellectual true believers trying to shape the debate into something approaching a civil religion with loyalty tests and a clericy that has the power to excommunicate.
John McCain was part of the 1980 wave that rolled into Congress on Ronald Reagan’s coattails. Indeed, McCain was among those Reagan was honored to stand with at 1974’s CPAC convention. But someone with an 82 percent lifetime ACU rating is considered a traitor to the cause. Much better, apparently, to flip 180 degrees on election eve and spout the right Party Line talking points.
As I wrote last year from CPAC, when throngs of so-called conservatives lined up for Ann Coulter’s autograph moments after she referred to John Edwards as a “faggot,” “Somehow, I can’t imagine Ronald Reagan being pleased.” Yet, the modern Conservative Moment seems to be dominated by the shrill nonsense of Coulter and Jonah Goldberg and Michael Savage and Neil Boortz. In short, the Conservative Movement is no longer particularly “conservative” at all.
And, indeed, there is a real EXCLUSIONARY tendency now in American politics — but it is not limited to just conservatives.
Even among liberals progressives (the new label), you can see some trying to drum others out of “the club” for not being pure enough (you see it in blogging and in elections). Someone not liberal enough is a conservative or worse….a moderate.
You see it in the center, too, where some centrists and moderates insist on litmus tests (usually if you don’t parrot every idea they agree with you are really a “liberal” or a “conservative.”).
On many fronts, American politics has more exclusionary tendencies than inclusionary. Perhaps that’s why there is a curious thing happening: you can find independent voters and young voters who like BOTH John McCain AND Barack Obama…even though the two don’t agree on many issues. The reason: both of these politicos are much more into coalition building — the politics of inclusion…and idea that American politics functions best when you aggregate (versus aggravate) interests.
So what Joyner is noting is perhaps a shift among GOPers away from the 1990s – early 2000s political culture where “consensus” and “compromise” and “coalition building” were words meaning weakness and blandness…and back to the idea that the United States can work best with a united versus a segmented polity.
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.