Obama vs. Clinton: What Tips the Scales

Watching some Democrats kick around Mrs. Clinton has grown into a sad spectacle.

Hillary Clinton would make a fine president and I think all reasonable people know that. She would make a better president, offering more constructive policies protecting more Americans, than McCain could ever hope to. Her problem is that Americans, in any given election cycle, can become inflamed with a true passion for change that can only exist in a country like ours. She does not represent that change as well as Mr. Obama does. In spite of her superior capabilities in many areas, Obama would still move into the White House with more foreign policy experience than George Bush had when Bush and his brother stole the election in 2000.

Americans can put up with a lot. After these past eight years, they have proven that they can put up with more than anyone ever imagined. However, that cannot hold forever.

What Mrs. Clinton has that Mr. Obama does not have, Mr. Obama can get. What Mr. Obama has that Mrs. Clinton does not have, she can never get.

Which one is the best hope at defeating McCain, who sounds more like a Bush brother with every passing day?

Comments

[Alox]

You are wrong. Why do the polls show McCain beating Hillary and Obama beating McCain? It is because many Americans, myself included, will vote for Obama...bu­t could never vote for Hillary. Hillary does not represent my values. Obama represents change, a change from Clinton/Bush.

[aspen]

I am not sure how Hillary doesn't represent your values and Obama does. On policy issues, there is very little difference between them.
Hillary has been steadfast, some would say too steadfast, in a long term marriage that has to have brought her more grief than comfort.

[ntmessage]

Those polls are national polls and not Electoral. All the arithmetic shows Hillary winning the electoral college and Barack losing to McCain.

[swanky]

That's right. He can't win where it counts.

[Puntarenus]

Obama will never beat the right wing conspiracy. The swiftboaters will have his lunch and dinner. Then the next morning start all over again with his breakfast. We are doomed if Obama is selected. My only hope is that the superdelegates see this as well and help Hillary take the nomination.

[darker]

The arrogance, stupidity, immaturity and
incompetence of American VOTERS is summed up
"nicely" in the posts above.

When will American voters show responsibility and not vote with their hysterical emotions?

Never. Spoiled Brats.

[HGS111]

Which irresponsible voters are you referring to ???

Take a look at how Obama is eating into the support among groups that have traditionally voted for Hillary Clinton:

Feb.5th vs Wisconsin
Women 43% 50%
Seniors 35% 41%
Union Households 44% 54%
Democrats 45% 53%
Whites 41% 54%
Economy Voters 44% 57%

And on top of that, Obama is getting even stronger among the groups that have always leaned toward him:

Feb. 5th vs Wisconsin
African-Americans 82% 91%
Young Voters 57% 70%
Independents 56% 64%
College Grads 52% 60%

[ntmessage]

The REAL overriding demographic was that Wisconsin like Iowa are neighboring states to Illinois, one of Obama’s home states. The Chicago, Milwaukee and even Madison have turned into a huge extraburb. All other lower slices of the data simply represent this fact. In IL, he won 65-33. In WI, he won 58-41. This is also, why comparisons to OH are incorrect. However since Axelrod’s great at manipulating the media, he has them talking about the OH demographic being the same as WI to try and peel off OH voters, hoping that people will just vote for Obama, because others like them (which they are not) did.

[milo9]

Alec, Alec, Alec, it's so simple. He's not Billary or BushCain. 'nuf said!

[ronr327]

Reflections (with notes) on Barack Obama versus Hillary Clinton

In political matters, as in many others, we tell ourselves stories about who we are, where we are going, and what we are about. When we grow tired of a story, or sense that a new one is needed, we go looking for it. These moments define periods of flux where change is both welcomed and a source of anxiety.

The late 1950’s and early 1960’s presented us with such a moment. We understood, at some deeper level, that the world had not only changed, but defined itself anew [1]. Yet there was, at a conscious level, no attendant framing story to articulate what was little more than a growing awareness.

On to the stage stepped John Kennedy. With his youth, wit, energy, vigor and intellect, he inspired us to believe we would forge a ‘new story’ to orient ourselves and move us successfully through the second half of the 20th century.

When he was killed, it all went away.

The only ones left standing were old politicians and their old politics. And they led us back to the past. It could be no other way. It was all they knew, and lacking both Kennedy’s sense the country was looking for something new, and our deeper longing for it, it was all they could do. [2]

So now, after 9/11, a new reality has shaped itself. So now an old politics, riddled with old contentions, holds our politics and politicians in thrall.

And onto the stage Barack Obama strides, calling for change. Young, vigorous, with a clear and penetrating intellect, he urges us to embrace a moment of flux, to stand forth once again as creatures of our hopes, to have the confidence we will discover a new story to orient ourselves, and our allies around the world, in constructive and purposeful endeavor.

It is in this that Obama’s great appeal resides. He is telling us: Have confidence in yourselves; working together

350 word limit! The rest, and KEY notes at: http://blogs.salon.com/0001185/2008/02/05.html

[Susan1968]

You're buying the Obama veener. Scratch the surface.

ALL of Obamas advisors are old-school political hacks dating back to the Clinton Administration.

Obama is NOT surrounded by "new" thinkers, "new" blood!

They're all middle-aged wonks who have been working Washington ALL THEIR LIVES and never held a real job other than "advisor."

RESEARCH YOUR CANDIDATE!

[ronr327]

Susan1968,

Did you follow the link?

It is my point that Obama has caught on to a moment in which we are looking to redfine ourselves, as Kennedy had before him. I don't believe Kennedy knew where it would take him (or us!), but he inspired confidence we could and would discover what we were seeking. After all, he did characterize his adminitration as 'The New Frontier'. For quite some time now Americans have felt the country 'was on the wrong track'. We are looking to find that track.

From the link:

The roll a Kennedy (or an Obama?) can play is to help catalyze the process. It is my claim that, in such a moment, a leader can inspire confidence in us that we will succeed in our search for new understandings, and, in such a moment, that is not trivial. If that leader is truly exceptional, he (or she) will be able to see the most useful and constructive elements in what emerges, and help ‘midwife’ them into being.

[DesertDivine]

The real problem about Hillary getting the nomination is the fact that she has been demonized for 13 years by the right wing media, especially talk radio. There is such hatred of her on the Republican side that she stands little chance of surviving and would be just as divisive as Bush has been should she win. The ironic part of this is that when you ask a Hillary hater why they dislike her, they cannot give you a reason. One person told me, "She has a plan for everything and I get sick of it". Yes, that is right. She is a policy wonk and DOES have a plan. That is much better than all the BS we hear on the Repub side. No plans or policies at all except that we should all be "very afraid." Clinton or Obama would make fine leaders. He just has a better chance of uniting us.

[aspen]

I hate to have the rightwing propaganda machine define progressive politics. By saying that Hillary is tainted by 13 years of hate radio ( which is true ) and therefore not the best candidate is to cave into the right wing media. Trust me they will smear Obama and already have.

[luziannagirl]

Yes, DesertDivine, you hit the nail on the head.

Hillary-Hate is based primarily NOT on issues, not on even conservative vs liberal/progressive attitudes, but upon her style. Ultimately, her style is portrayed in rightwing hate radio as that of a bossy, bitchy, vindictive, and unattractive female.

It's essentially a sexist smear. And, since this country is by many considered opinions farther ahead in racial equality than gender equality, an opinion certainly backed up by history, a black man is therefore more "electable" than a woman of any race.

If Hillary wants to win the Presidency, she has an uphill battle because in every sound byte & photo op, she has to come across as strong, but also soft, feminine, gentle, attractive, and non-bitchty. Talk abt a tight little box to work in...

[goldenshaman]

It is totally obvious that Obama has caught the wave and Hillary has not.

The Democrats would be totally stupid to spurn such an obvious vote getter.

They would deserve the punishment that would result.

The punishment would come from a lot of voters who will not fall into line this time.

If the party hacks screw us on this one we will pay them back by voting for a Green or even McCain.

[BrooklynAlbee]

"Hasn't got, can get; has got, can never get."
Wrong. There's been much advance in sex-change surgery.

[yasou11]

wisechild, you said: "in reviewing her legislation while in congress I don't see anything too impressive­..."

here's a sample of some of the legislation that hillary either authored or co-sponsored. the info is taking right from congress's website.
And by the way.rencen­tly i find a fuuny web~~SenoirWoo .com~~ It's a site for successful boomer singles to mingle.

[UrbanInterloper]

Obama has always been a leader. Clinton has always been a follower. He loudly opposed the war in 2002; she voted for it in 2002. It's really that simple. She had an opportunity to lead, but she lacked the courage to do so.

How could she not know her Iraq vote would be the nail in her presidential campaign's coffin?

Obama's foreign policy experience is another irrelevant distraction. Obama not only has more experience at this point in his career than did Bush in 2000, but also Presidents Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter, all of whom were former governors who developed robust foreign policies. It's more a question of good judgment, courage and national leadership than experience. Obama has exhibited all three by the bucketload.

[GregQuindel]

What polls say in February is totally meaningless as to what Americans will do in November - MEANINGLESS. Remember where Hillary was 6 months ago? McCain? Hillary haters will not vote for Obama - period. Obama and his supporters are dreaming and I don’t want to wake up in November to a McCain Presidency. I really like Obama but when it comes down to an election against McCain, Hillary is the much stronger candidate. And while it might not be popular in the primaries (and the absurdly undemocratic caucuses) Hillary’s vote to authorize (NOT TO GO TO WAR) will be much easier to defend against McCain rather than what will appear to be a typical weak-on-defense liberal. Obama’s lack of experience is almost an advantage with wide-eyed liberals in the primaries but will devastate him (and our country) in November. I wish these things weren’t true. I just hope Democrats wake up before it’s too late.

[fdwcrm]

You're absolutely correct.

[HST]

The only thing correct in your post is that the current polls are meaningless. Hillary haters will not vote for Obama -WRONG! Moderate repubs will. As for Hillary's war vote don't you remember the Kerry attack ads "he was for the war before it voted against it"? As for Obama's perceived lack of experience all he has do is remind people that he was scoffed at when suggested going after the terrorists in Pakistan and the the Pres. did just that SUCCESFULLY. As i see it the election will play out for better or worse as Obama the "new young candidate" vs. McCain "the old same old" and this doesn't bode well for the GOP.
Note: I current back "anybody but the GOP" for president.

[OSUMercutio]

Obama is getting favorable media coverage? Give me a break! If Obama had lost ten primaries and caucuses in a row, Obama would be getting the cold shoulder from the media. But instead, the press is treating this as if Clinton has every chance in the world to win this thing even though she has been getting blown out week after week.

[JJflowgoer]

Alec, thank you for articulating my own intellectual challenge regarding this race right now. I am not a blind HRC fan. Nor am I an Obama foe. At this point, I do believe that Obama will win the nomination. But I am sad that once again, the winner is being chosen via a popularity contest - rather than ability. Our country is way too broken to rely on HOPE or engaging the masses to correct what's wrong. 8 years of Bush, an administration without compromise, is not going to be righted by a compromising 'everyone sit at the table' Obama administration. Obama is fine. He's certainly fits an 'anyone is better than Bush' bent - but I'd just prefer to have someone in the Oval with balls who would fix things. I am without health care. I almost guarantee that 4 years from now, I'll still be without health care. Obama will still be trying to get everyone to the table - or, figure out how the system works to change things. Hillary would kick butt. Obama will make nice. I'm not confused at all about which I prefer.

[Jjc2006]

This is American Idol redux. MSNBC plays Simon Cowell and trashes, mocks and insults Hillary. Why? Matthews has a personal vendetta and MSNBC is basically the ALL BOYS ALL THE TIME network.

And here, on Huff, it's the old "any woman, just not THIS woman" (which considering her accomplishments over a lifetime is an amazingly bigoted statement). It reminds me of the "any Black man, just not THIS Black man" used against Jesse Jackson. Jesse was not perfect. He had flaws. So does Hillary (and yea she does not have a penis either).

Somehow though Barack is the second coming. I think I get why. Joe (neocon tool) Scarborough said it well on his show. "(Barack) Obama doesn't make me feel guilty!" Now isn't that special.

Jesse Jackson CHALLENGED the white establishment (and that included the liberal establishment). Hillary has challenged the ALL MALE white establishment. And boohoo, white elitists, along with neocons, don't like feeling guilty.

I am saddened that this country has been so blinded. Hillary is the best candidate. Obama's time will come. But as usual the all male, all white elitist will shut out the one who represents the most under represented group world wide...poo­r women, just so they can feel better about themselves.

[3bugsmom]

JJflowgoer - Please remember that Barack will have a cabinent..­.if his judgement has been as good as it has been he'll select a very sound cabinent of advisors that will help him in areas that you and others may feel he is weak. I agree that we can not simply live on hope, but we can not simply continue the great divide of partisan. Many have tried and few have succeeded, but you don't ever give up. Obama hasn't yet acquired as many haters as Hillary. Don't get me wrong, Hillary is a strong candidate, but reaching across partisans has never been her strong suit. All democrats, independents, and even republicans who are sick of this gridlock should hold these elected officials accountable. We the people have to take a stand as well and if they are not representing our needs...th­en WE have to hold them accountable and exercise our power to get rid of them. Obama is not a one man show...it will take us all. We've tried with the Clintons and although things were good economically, you have to admit some things have fallen through the cracks because of the division between Dems and Repubs. Why not give Obama a chance?

[Rachel36]

Let's keep one thing mind, no matter who is in office; there will be roughly 2-4 years of residual blow-back from the previous administration. Ostensibly, for anyone to truly untangle this Bush web, they'd need a second term.

[sagopalm]

The assumption that Hillary is unelectable based on her gender is wrong and based on lazy thinking. There are justifiable reasons for not voting for her that have nothing to do with her gender. For one; her voting record pertaining to the war in Iraq. Secondly, and I have a Huge problem with this...she accepts campaign contributions from Rupert Murdoch, of ALL PEOPLE!
I'm glad to vote for Obama.

[wisechild]

I think both are good candidates and they offer different things but ultimately they offer a change from Bushisms and McCain seems to be a continuation of same.

The thing is that Hillary will mobilize too many negative forces and the focus will become Bill, Hill, Sex, Lies and Ken Starr plus all the other drama we are all sick of.

I know the right wing will be gunning for Obama but he is not Bambi and he will survive. I believe McCain can be beat by both of them but HRC will make it a much closer race.

Obama has strength in areas that seem to matter to a great many people right now. He has become a container for our hopes and dreams.

HRC is a machine who can appear strong and tough when we need that. However, in reviewing her legislation while in congress I don't see anything too impressive so I'm going for change, hope and a clean slate.

It's up to us to speak the truth when the shit comes down and we know it will. This is our opportunity to course correct what has gone off the rails for 7 years.

Don't be fooled and don't get petty. We need to beat the roves, the swift boaters, the noise machines and those who lie and reverse the truth.

[frenchie25]

wisechild, you said: "in reviewing her legislation while in congress I don't see anything too impressive­..."

here's a sample of some of the legislation that hillary either authored or co-sponsored. the info is taking right from congress's website.

please note of the health care, education, civil rights, economic and student loan initiatives, all of which she continues to talk about during this campaign.

obama may win on style, but hillary wins on substance every time. how can you be an agent for change when you vote "present" or do not cast a vote at all? THAT is obama's record.

79 . Procedural Fairness for September 11 Victims Act [S.2106.IS­]

94 . Preserving Patient Access to Inpatient Rehabilitation Hospitals Act [S.543.IS]

119. Fair Minimum Wage Act [S.2.PCS]

133 . War Profiteering Prevention Act ([S.119.IS­]

140 . Early Treatment for HIV Act [S.860.IS]

157 . Neighborhood Reclamation and Revitalization Program Act [S.2054.IS­]

159 . 9/11 Heroes Health Improvement Act [S.120.IS]

165 . Improved Vaccine Supply Act [S.2476.IS­]

181 . Supply Our Soldiers Act [S.1444.IS­]

206 . Emergency Contraception Education Act [S.2108.IS­]

217 . Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act [S.5.PCS]

243 . Military Family and Medical Leave Act [S.1898.IS­]

247 . Protecting Military Family Financial Benefits Act [S.1063.IS­]

252 . Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act [S.2521.IS­]

282 . Quality Child Care for America Act[S.2187­.IS]

291 . School Food Fresh Act [S.1031.IS­]

311 . Compassionate Assistance for Rape Emergencies Act [S.1240.IS­]

322 . Rural Students College, Career, and Community Readiness Act [S.1787.IS­]

336 . Emergency Unemployment Compensation Extension Act [S.2544.IS­]

376 . Paycheck Fairness Act [S.766.IS]

377 . Working Families Flexibility Act [S.2419.IS­]

378 . Medicare Prescription Drug Price Negotiation Act [S.3.RS]

391 . Student Loan Sunshine Act [S.486.IS]

402 . Homeowners’ Defense Act [S.2310.IS­]

479 . Children’s Health First Act [S.895.IS]

480 . Civil Rights Act of 2008[S.255­4.IS]

510 . Children’s Health and Medicare Protection Act [H.R.3162.­EH]

[monique]

frenchie25,

Maybe if you say it long enough and loud enough, people will start to wake up from their hope-induced coma. Keep it up!

Why is this so difficult for people to understand? Just as in any relationship, you don't just listen to people's words, you look at their actions! Her actions speak volumes--she works her butt off and is dedicated. Even her former critics say so--they can not dispute it.

How do people think they will get this HUGE change by voting for someone who has not even been very successful as a legislator? It is dumbfounding.

I like the guy, but MY GOD, you have to look at the larger picture. It is not about him standing in an arena, talking to thousands of people. It is about what he is capable of doing once the crowds are gone. It is about what he has shown his strengths to be. We can't use a President whose major strength is giving motivational speeches. We need action and hard work. Change doesn't just happen.