Obama - a new hope??

Muiriosa

There are many people I know who are very keen observers of politics and indeed american politics who have become extremely cynical during the two term reign of George W Bush, and can you blame them?

What do people think of American Politics? I have been very impressed with what I have seen of Barek Obama who is aiming to get the Democratic nomination to run for president. He is doing quite well and seems to have very positive policies in his politics. If Obama was elected president could it be a hope for the world that things would change in any way? He has promised withdrawal from Iraq and rebuilding of American society. Surely compared to Bush it could be a welcomed development in the next year or so.

Opinions anyone??

mike65

First off Obama will not get the democratic nomination so this thread is proberly dead in the water, but even if he beat Clinton and won the election I would'nt hold my breath. All political leaders are compromised from the very start by the overflowing "in tray".

He may promise the sun moon and stars but he won't deliver on any. The best he could do is change the tone of US policy. Changing the substance is
another matter the USA won't suddenely become all fluffy and cute cos the USA has never been so.

Sorry if that a bit dour but countries (esp big ones) look after thier own best interests in any way they see fit. So Obama could send troops into action just as quickly as any supposedly 'evil' Republican.

Mike.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

yes, but with obama you could at least hope for a minor catastrophe. Republicans tend to go all out. You haven't lost until you've lost big.

AbusesToilets

Obama is a light weight,he has,i think,2 years in Congress.He was on one of the political shows recently and asked about Iraq,where he stated that he was all for pulling.When he was subsequently questioned about the likely results of this move he quickly back tracked.No transcript to that,so take it for what it's worth but i haven't been that impressed with him.
The best development from the election would be to have a skilled politician as President.Someone without an all emcompassing ideology who is simply there to do a good job - sound economy,stable foreign relations,military action kept to the necessary minimums.

Dirk Gently

Mordeth wrote:

yes, but with obama you could at least hope for a minor catastrophe..

Like launching strikes against regions in Pakistan without pakistan consent?

lostexpectation

obama wants the us troops pulled back to the barracks he doesnt wnat them all to leave...

i don't know where obama comes from, he has huge amount of money backers, I think he'll fade quickly in the end, I don't know what is his thing is apart from a bit of youth and enthusiam?

who are the netroots looking? for dems, at dailykos had there convention last weekend they booed clinton over her lobbying money but she still seems strong, it strange having the wife of former president going for the job... we've already had son and father so I suppose it no stranger she's took n a similar route to Bill lawyer-DA-senator..?

even though Kucinich is the only one to have voted against the iraq war he seems a bit stale, he isn't somebody they can discover...

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/08/clintons_tame_session_with_the.html.

Dr_Teeth

The only candidate that has impressed me so far is Ron Paul.

spank_inferno

I think as the primarys approach the weight of the democratic party may (unofficialy) move behind Clinton.
But it depends who gets the "Big Mo".
Should obama sneak a few victories in early primaries momentum generated could carry him home.

I'd personaly prefer Clinton. I dont want to like her!
But she has a professionalism & strength that I think Obama lacks.
She gets criticised too much for changing her stance on Iraq.
Someone who sees their error and changes their mind isnt a flip-flopper.

PeakOutput

is it possible for clinto to get the presidential nomination with obama as the vice president? i think that could be a winning combo but dont know if its possible and ego would probably prevent it anyway


ot; the election is more than a year away and the campaign has been going on for almost a year already its ridicolous

Akrasia

Dr_Teeth wrote:

The only candidate that has impressed me so far is Ron Paul.

I really hope that was a joke

spank_inferno

Yep clinton could run Obama on the ticket as VP.
Its the candidates choise who to run with.
Usually chosen before the national conventions AFAIK.

Obama isnt a bad choise.
But I think its more likely someone more heavy-weight, a senior Dem Senator/secretary with foreign affairs experience.
It will be hard for many americans to accept Clinton at the top of the ticket.
A stong senior more moderate democrate as vp would appeal to centralists/moderate republicans.
.

The_Minister

If I was Clinton, I would never make Obama Vice. All it takes is one black power nutter to decide to make a black president, and she could end up like Kennedy. Why make so many thousand extra would be assassins?

Akrasia

The_Minister wrote:

If I was Clinton, I would never make Obama Vice. All it takes is one black power nutter to decide to make a black president, and she could end up like Kennedy. Why make so many thousand extra would be assassins?

I think the 'war on terror' which she fully supports has covered that base already

lostexpectation

ok so obama is more antiwar then clinton but he justa bit blaa

I was expecting wesley clark or bloomberg even buchanan to shake things up as some point

super_furry

Does it matter really? You're just getting one brand of vanilla ice-cream over another, regardless of who wins. The differences between the two major parties in America are negligable.

insafehands

The_Minister wrote:

If I was Clinton, I would never make Obama Vice. All it takes is one black power nutter to decide to make a black president, and she could end up like Kennedy. Why make so many thousand extra would be assassins?

Not sure if you got it from him, but that's an Eddie Murphy joke. And to be honest, the post was a bit stupid. If Obama becomes CIC (mis-use of term but whatever) and Hilary is VP, there could equally be some "girl power" nutter and Obama is the next JFK.

Sorry, but it really was a foolish post.

Dr_Teeth

Akrasia wrote:

I really hope that was a joke

Why?

silverharp

Dr_Teeth wrote:

The only candidate that has impressed me so far is Ron Paul.

I'd like to see him get elected but he is very much an outsider. In general though the US is an empire and the leaders are the corporatocracy, so the original question is almost meaningless. does anyone think people like bush or clinton were the brains of the operation?

AbusesToilets

I would like to see Bloomberg run as an independant.i think he could make it a proper 3 candidate race which would be very interesting.At the very least he could highlight the other candidates deficencies and promote soem more realistic debate

The_Minister

insafehands wrote:

Not sure if you got it from him, but that's an Eddie Murphy joke. And to be honest, the post was a bit stupid.

I didn't realise Eddie Murphy had said it. When did he say it.

insafehands wrote:

If Obama becomes CIC (mis-use of term but whatever) and Hilary is VP, there could equally be some "girl power" nutter and Obama is the next JFK.

I think you will find that there are far more "black power" nutters out there ready to kill, than there are feminists. The black community in America has a really hardline fringe, who still feel bitter about slavery and wants the "Black Power" ideals of complete seperation to be enforced.
Although, now that I reflect, alot of American commentators have been saying that Obama is not "black enough" to get hardline support.
Given the feelings of anger, isolation, and the history of violence in that particular movement, I think it would be a concern

is_that_so

If we were working on the basis of all the potential nutters that could affect candidates many would not run. All US politicians who run for President take that risk. As regards the question itself, I think there are a number of factors against him.

Firstly I think he is too young and too inexperienced. Secondly there is that "black" thing. He is not wholly representative of African-Americans either, given that his father is from Kenya.

Also that is a giant leap for America. The step to a woman president is a smaller one. Nevertheless I think the Clinton-Obama ticket is one that makes sense. He'll learn a lot, gain enormous exposure and in 8 years time people won't remember to even question where he comes from.

The appearance of Bloomberg will make interesting except he can't and IMO shouldn't win. A country cannot be run like a business however much you desire it. That and the fact that his campaign finance is personal suggests to me that he is looking at buying the presidency.

Although any candidate is really doing that , at least where fundraising has supported a campaign you can identify who contributed and how much.

Not supporting someone because the aren't a white male is stupid. That said supporting someone because just because they are a minority/female is nearly as bad. I think this is happening to some degree with Obama.

lostexpectation

how and why did bill clinton win again?

the only reason obama is popular is cos some commentator compared him to JFK, I don't see how he is like JFK?

brianthebard

Obama represents a minority in America, and minorities rarely get elected to the highest offices in any country. There are only about a half dozen black congressmen. I don't think America is ready for a black president.
Clinton has the experience, and the most democrat support, but I've heard that a lot of American people really dislike her. I imagine that many if not most of them are republicans though.

Benedict XVI

The_Minister wrote:

Although, now that I reflect, alot of American commentators have been saying that Obama is not "black enough" to get hardline support.

that is very true, a good example is in the article below from the Boston Globe.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/04/11/obamas_silence_on_imus_alarms_some_blacks/

Ping Chow Chi

The_Minister wrote:

I didn't realise Eddie Murphy had said it. When did he say it.

I think it was Chris Rock, when there was talk of that black retired general (forget his name now) becoming vice to Bush.

The_Minister wrote:

I didn't realise Eddie Murphy had said it. When did he say it.

I think you will find that there are far more "black power" nutters out there ready to kill, than there are feminists.

I would think that the white 'nutters' who would kill would out number both of the above added together and Obama would be the most likely to be killed (in my opinion).

purple'n'gold

For what its worth, my humble opinion is that when push comes to shove, the Democrats will opt for John Edwards for their presidential candidate. They will get wobbly about Hilary and Obama.

irishash

purplengold wrote:

For what its worth, my humble opinion is that when push comes to shove, the Democrats will opt for John Edwards for their presidential candidate. They will get wobbly about Hilary and Obama.

i would tend to agree with the above statement - but not because i believe he is the best candidate or because the members of the democratic party want him more than the other 2.

lets look at the fact that since the US became an independent entity back in the 18 century, there has never been a female candidate or a black candidate (and of course you could say that for a lot of countries until the 20th century unless you think of cleopatra )

now the party may be given the choice to make history - either give clinton the nod or obama. will they crumble during the primaries and go for the safe choice in edwards ??? you bet !!! the weight of history is something the US has never been able to take the burden of, and it will prove the same this time. BUT i really hope i am wrong. i really want it to be obama or clinton.

all the same the republicans are loving this - clinton gets the nod, and every single republican voter will turn out just to spite her for their hatred of her is unbelivable. obama gets the nod, and conservative america gets up and votes like mad. whoever the opposing candidate for the republican party, they will have a lead over clinton or obama based simply on gender or race. and that is really sad.

oh and as a side note - what are the chances of condi rice going for it - black and a woman - no probs !!! :rolleyes:

bobbyjoe

Hope Al Gore goes for it.

RedPlanet

irishash wrote:

lets look at the fact that since the US became an independent entity back in the 18 century, there has never been a female candidate or a black candidate (and of course you could say that for a lot of countries until the 20th century unless you think of cleopatra )

Never heard of Jesse Jackson huh?
There was also a woman canidate on the Republican ticket awhile back, i think it was when Clinton won the 1st time; but she lost out in the Primaries or whatever and didn't get the nomination.

Oh who am i kidding.
Wikipedia rules
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_United_States_presidential_and_vice-presidential_candidates
1872

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African-American_firsts
1932

Benedict XVI

irishash wrote:

all the same the republicans are loving this - clinton gets the nod, and every single republican voter will turn out just to spite her for their hatred of her is unbelivable.

And millions of democrats will also turn out and vote against her cos she is universally hated.

irishash wrote:

obama gets the nod, and conservative america gets up and votes like mad

As will the millions of democrats (epically in the south) that will not be too wild about the though of a black president .

Remember one of the biggest opponents of integration in the 1960, Alabama Governor George Wallace, ran for president, as a Democrat

People should stop looking at Clinton or Obama as the next president.

I’d put my money on the LDS man Romney