Democratic party activists and Democrats in general often say their party has two great candidates, no matter who gets the nomination — unless they’re Barack Obama supporters saying they’d never vote for Hillary Clinton if she gets the nomination or Clinton supporters saying they’d never vote for Obama if he gets the nomination.
When Democrats put aside their anger, they often describe the candidates as to topflight choices. But MSNBC’s First Thoughts looks at Clinton and Obama and proclaims “Enough Baggage To Fill A Plane”:
There’s also plenty baggage going into tomorrow…
Clinton can’t name a single economist to back up her gas-tax plan. While it’s easy to dismiss the idea that economists are heartless folks, isn’t one of the chief criticisms of Bush is that he doesn’t listen to experts? Also, Clinton defended her “obliterate” Iran comment on Sunday, but refused to reuse the word (doesn’t that suggest she DOES regret the choice of words?)
Meanwhile, Obama may have to explain at some point his quid pro quo with the Teamsters; how does one who is promising a new transparency in politics promise something that the general public has to find out about via reporters asking tough questions? And then there’s Wright, Wright, Wright. When Obama can get through a TV interview without the name Rev. Wright coming up, that’s when he’ll know he’s out of the woods. So far, he’s not out of the woods.
And, indeed, both of these candidates have negative aspects that the GOPers will most assuredly exploit come November. Indeed: viewed in this context, the idea of a “dream ticket” of Obama-Clinton or Clinton-Obama could be seen as a boon to the Democrats but a,lso as a kind of Disneyland for Republicans in terms of targets and rallying their party’s base. (I still predict the “Dream Ticket” is more of an “In Your Dreams” ticket due to seeming irreperable anger between the two camps and how each side demonizes the other).
And McCain?
McCain has a host of vulnerabilities (his positions today versus what they were when he ran against Bush in 2000, his ties to his own divisive religious figures, the frequent corrections he has to make after speeches or comments in terms of accuracy, and — most critically — whether he is truly independent or a McCain administration in terms of staffing and ideas will really be Bush III) that have not been addressed by Democrats who are too busy beating each other up and raising each others’ negatives.
So perhaps First Thought’s analysis should be revised:
Both parties now have likely candidates who are carrying so much much baggage that TSA will have to inspect them.
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.