Camden Chat: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Around SBN: MLB Hot Stove: blogging the rumors, trades, signings Bar-right-arrows



Off-topic: I CAN'T DECIDE - OBAMA VERSUS CLINTON

I have to vote in 24 hours and I still haven't decided.  I am a little tired of all the "change" rhetoric, and its variations, associated with Obama because it's a politically vacuous word.  Obama staff is made up all veteran Washington insiders.  It's not like he represents some break from the "Washington business as usual" staleness that voters are disaffected with.  Paul Krugman just wrote a column this morning concluding that his health care plan isn't passable.  And in comparison to Clinton's plan, it doesn't cover as many people and is more expensive.  But in terms of integrity (the other popular Obama phrase word), Obama seems to be superior.  I say "seems" because Obama's service in highly visible political positions isn't nearly as long as Hillary's thus he hasn't been vetted as closely.  But we do know that Clintons can be cut throat and unscrupulous.  And Clinton is certainly a divisive figure.  Poll data from NPR shows that Hillary is much better than Obama in unifying the democratic base.  But, unlike Obama, she's just as effective in unifying the Republican base against her.  In other words, some Republicans may vote Obama while they're likely to vote against Hillary just for the sake of spiting her.  If you want to throw in your two cents on who I should vote for, go ahead.  

FanPosts are user-created content and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editors of Camden Chat or SB Nation. They might, though.

0 recs | Comment 27 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Please, please, please
vote for Obama. We need to win the general here. McCain will slaughter Hillary in the general. Obama has the perfect storm brewing, with these series of high profile endorsements, and look for an Al Gore endorsement pretty soon. I don't have a problem with either in the White House, I just don't need a Republican in the White House for four more years and Obama seems to have a much cleaner path to Pennsylvania Avenue.
"All I have to say is our partner is going to shock the world because he is none other than THE SHOCKMASTER!"-Sting

by jobe on Feb 4, 2008 2:45 PM EST   0 recs

McCain
"McCain will slaughter Hillary in the general."

NPR's poll data show that Hillary and Obama are both within the margin of error against McCain.

And I forgot to add above, NPR's data shows that Obama is better at attracting independents, again highlighting Clinton's divisive nature.  

Rocky Cherry, O's pitcher, not the ice cream flavor.

by birdman on Feb 4, 2008 2:53 PM EST   0 recs

Here's how I see it
Hillary is hated by too many people to win big. On the other hand, she's too skilled politically to lose big. You're looking at a close one in Nov. either way with her.

Obama is the high risk, high reward candidate. By Nov. he can have everyone sitting around the campfire singing Stimpy's "happy happy, joy joy" song & win 40 states. Or his campaign could be an endless string of rookie mistakes (some of which he's already made vs Hillary) & lose 40 states.

There it is for you. Wanna play it safe? Hillary. Wanna take a chance? Obama.

This is only in terms of winning a match up against Hog Jowls McCain and his "100 Year War". As for the substance of who would actually make the best president, my favourite is Ron Paul.

Yeah, he seems to be orbiting Neptune with that whole gold standard thing. And I had a really, really hard time forgiving him for voting in favour, on all 4 counts, of impeaching B. Clinton over a matter that was beneath trivial.

But not only has he been consistently been against the Iraq war, as opposed to turning against it only after That Mandrill in the White House dropped from 85% to 25%, he's against the whole premise of EVER going to war unless the very survival of the Republic is in danger if we don't. And that's a position not even Obama has taken. And it's an issue that's worth more than all the others put together.  

"You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever." - Ron White

by Sluggo on Feb 4, 2008 2:58 PM EST   0 recs

high reward
"There it is for you. Wanna play it safe? Hillary. Wanna take a chance? Obama."

But they're vitually the same in terms of policy.  I don't understand how Obama represnets a higher reward candidate.... and Krugman's column this morning didn't exactly bode well for Barack's policy development skills, not that I'm going to put a lot of stakes in one column.      

Rocky Cherry, O's pitcher, not the ice cream flavor.

by birdman on Feb 4, 2008 3:12 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Context
What I'm saying here is that I think there's much more "blow out" potential in either direction if Obama is the nominee, while a Hillary election would be a lot closer.

As for what either of them would actually DO as of next Jan. 20, I didn't speculate.

"You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever." - Ron White

by Sluggo on Feb 4, 2008 3:31 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Gotcha
So it's electability issue.  Good point.
Rocky Cherry, O's pitcher, not the ice cream flavor.

by birdman on Feb 4, 2008 3:49 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

The only policy difference I've seen
is that Obama supports decriminalization of marijuana, which in itself isn't such a major thing, but the fact that he's willing to take a chance and support an issue like that says something to me.

by Stanicek on Feb 4, 2008 10:10 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Change
You make the point that Obama's "change" rhetoric is vacuous and he's surrounded himself by Washington insiders so he's really no different than anyone else.

My response:

  1. When you look behind the sound bites, there is real substance to his focus on change, both in his policies (which really aren't much different than Hillary's) and in the way he goes about politics.
  2. His political goal and his means to attaining that goal are all about bringing the country together in a large coalition to discover its commonalities and bring about that change. That might sound vacuous, but when you look at his experience in community organizing, he really has been doing that his whole life.
Community organizing is about getting people out of their private lives, meeting their neighbors, and finding out how they often share the same hopes and struggles. What Obama is doing in his campaign is the same thing but on a macro scale. I think it portends what his presidency will be like.

Sure, he knows he'll be hit hard by the Republicans and entrenched corporate interests. It's not going to be all Kumbaya. But he is calculating that it will be easier to create change--and we'll create more lasting change--if he enlists citizens in national politics. If he organizes them to work together for universal health care, to fight poverty, for affordable higher education, and to create a more humane and truly secure foreign policy.

3. The alternative to this kind of politics is the Karl Rove politics we've been used to. Aim for 50% plus one and use cheap political tactics to slice and dice the electorate and turn just enough people against your opponent that you win the election. Then work the levers of power to push your agenda through. Hillary knows how to play this game and that's what she'll be forced to do because she has a ceiling on the number of independents and Republicans she can get to cross over and vote for her.

Hillary may be able to win the election that way. She may be able to get some good things done in Washington that way. But she won't be able to change things on the scale that Obama could.

You are breaking up the "electable" argument from the post-inauguration argument, but I think you have to look at it holistically. We are at a point in our history where the nation is ready for serious change. We're talking once in a generation political realignment. Obama can tap into that, win a huge electoral majority, and bring huge Congressional majorities along with him--maybe even a filibuster-proof Senate. (That's one reason why all these red state governors and members of Congress have endorsed him. They know he can win their states and bring others along with him on his coattails while Hillary can't.)

Obama can then build on that electoral coalition to bring about the "change" everyone is speaking of because he'll have changed the nation's political culture. If there's one thing we've learned in the last 8 years, it's that the political culture of this country matters a great deal and it is more often than not set by the president.

Whew.

by silverstadium on Feb 4, 2008 4:09 PM EST   0 recs

Obama
"His political goal and his means to attaining that goal are all about bringing the country together in a large coalition to discover its commonalities and bring about that change. That might sound vacuous, but when you look at his experience in community organizing,"

Yeah, that does sound vague thus I'm not sure what the value community organizing holds in relation to that context.  

"But he is calculating that it will be easier to create change--and we'll create more lasting change--if he enlists citizens in national politics."

Sure, democracy entails enlisting citizens.  I'm not sure why Obama is more qualified than Clinton.    

"We're talking once in a generation political realignment. Obama can tap into that,"

In terms of coalition building, I'm not sure Obama has a distinct advantage.  Both Clinton and Obama hold strengths and weaknesses in this regard.  Obama doesn't carry the stigma of the Clinton name but Clinton is more effective in mobilizing the Democratic base.  

"he'll have changed the nation's political culture."

To what?

Rocky Cherry, O's pitcher, not the ice cream flavor.

by birdman on Feb 4, 2008 5:21 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

There's this...
"But we do know that Clintons can be cut throat and unscrupulous."

As will her opponent in November - The Rs play for keeps, my friend. Do you want someone who knows enough to carry a gun to a gun fight or still brings a knife?

I'm going with Obama, but if "electibility" is your worry, I'd bet money on Hillary. I wouldn't on Obama.

I remember 14 straight foul balls in one at-bat.

by duck on Feb 4, 2008 4:39 PM EST   0 recs

Duck, you kick ass!
We need more people who both watch Nascar and vote with the Dems.
"All I have to say is our partner is going to shock the world because he is none other than THE SHOCKMASTER!"-Sting

by jobe on Feb 4, 2008 5:19 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

First vote
was for Mike Dukakis in 1988.

Of course, I spent the next two elections in a wilderness of doubt - Perot in '92 and Dole in '96. Never quite forgiven myself for those two. Well, at least for the Dole one, anyway.

Nobody eats Bob Dole's peanut butter.

/too obscure?
//SC is guaranteed to get it, anyway.

I remember 14 straight foul balls in one at-bat.

by duck on Feb 4, 2008 8:10 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Oh, there's nothing wrong
with a "lifetime achievement award" vote for someone when he has no chance of winning the state or the country.

But if enough people start to think that way... Let's hope this doesn't happen with McCain.

"You can't fix stupid. Stupid is forever." - Ron White

by Sluggo on Feb 4, 2008 8:23 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

Obama
I was leaning toward Edwards, but I've decided to vote for Obama. I'm hoping he can be as much a conduit of change as he has promised.

by RobG on Feb 4, 2008 5:29 PM EST   0 recs

re:
From a friend of a friend in my mail tonight

This morning, my father called. He is a principled Republican who voted for Bush twice. For the last seven years, it's been hard talking to him about politics at the dinner table, but it's been even harder hearing my progressive friends talk about "all those stupid people who voted for Bush." "My father is not stupid," I would retort, exhausted by the political rancor. That's all beginning to change.

"I read the book you gave me," my dad said this morning, after finishing The Audacity of Hope. "I don't agree with all of Obama's politics, but I hear myself in him. He doesn't demonize people. He's the voice of a new generation; reminds me of Reagan and Kennedy. I'm a pragmatist, but I feel really hopeful and inspired by this movement. It could really bring the country together."

My father has switched to the Democratic party for the first time in his life just to vote for Obama in the primary this Tuesday. I take it as a sign. Obama alone can reach people like my father, who would never support a Clinton dynasty in the general election. Obama alone can unite conservatives and liberals, young and old, people of faith and non-believers, black and white and everyone between. Obama alone can inspire an entire generation of disenchanted young people like me to take ownership of our country.

In the end, the choice between Clinton and Obama is not between their policy differences, which are nuanced, nor between their respective experience, for Obama's two decades as a public servant is plenty preparation. The choice is between two different kinds of presidents: Clinton is an executive, Obama a visionary. Clinton proposes to accomplish a set of goals, Obama aims to transform and revitalize our very culture. Cliniton reinforces the old walls, Obama breaks them down so that my father and I find ourselves standing on the same common ground.

Interesting stuff, huh?

I'm personally voting Obama tomorrow.

Clinton would do a great job of running the country, but wants to take it all on her own shoulders. She'd be good at running the system the way it is now, which means ruling with 51%.

I think Obama will go beyond that and get people to believe in the country again, to believe in government again, to lift each other up. I think he could forge a new system and make this country the way I want it to be.


Batting fourth....playing center field....

by zknower on Feb 4, 2008 10:56 PM EST   0 recs

Thanks everyone
I'm leaning towards Obama by a nudge... I reserve the right to change my mind tomorrow morning.  As SC story illustrates, I think Obama can reach out to independents and Republicans better than Clinton (although I still believe Clinton can energize the base better).  The data substantiates this claim.  I still sick of all "change" garbage but it isn't a big deal.  I like both candidates quite a bit so I really don't care who wins tomorrow.  I'll happily vote for either come November.  
Rocky Cherry, O's pitcher, not the ice cream flavor.

by birdman on Feb 5, 2008 1:12 AM EST   0 recs

I'm a field coordinator for Obama
I haven't slept since December. Haven't even been able to follow the Bedard drama.

Vote for Barack. Please.

"It would behoove the Orioles to play better." - Jim Palmer

by 2632 on Feb 5, 2008 8:16 AM EST   0 recs

26! I wanna bear your children AGAIN!
I just voted for Obama online-- after navigating various security devices apparently designed to keep me from voting, getting on a plane to Rochester and voting again there-- and even have a printout to prove it. (Y'know, if they'd only had printouts in West Palm Beach in '00, we wouldn't be in this mess.)

According to the Democratic Party Committee Abroad, us expats get to send 22 delegates to the DemCon (wherever that is), and I just inched them closer to BO's corner. But who knows how the weirdo expats in Fiji or someplace are gonna go?

Anyway, I will use the paper in class for show 'n' tell next week (it's actually sort of a nice souvenir-looking thing) and encourage my students to hang in there til the day when they too may be issued a printout (for Kasparov or something) which will serve as proof of their sanity.

And whether or not BO wins this nomination, I can say this, all kidding aside: I feel as good about the nomination vote I just cast as I ever have about voting, back to pulling the lever for McGovern-- and against the contemptible, felonious Nixon-- in a garage in Menlo Park, CA, in 1972. Somehow, you just KNOW when it's the Right Thing to Do.

Forget it, Jake. It's Birdland.

by Titov on Feb 5, 2008 9:10 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

1st Expat Results Are In: Obama Sweeps...
Jakarta! No sh*t! 75% of the vote! Woo-hoo!

http://real-us.news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20080205/cm_thenation/45280615_1

That should counterbalance the idiots in Fiji. Now, if we can just hold up our end in Moscow...

Forget it, Jake. It's Birdland.

by Titov on Feb 5, 2008 4:19 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

in case anyone cares
I went with Obama.  
Rocky Cherry, O's pitcher, not the ice cream flavor.

by birdman on Feb 5, 2008 1:56 PM EST   0 recs

Woo hoo!
Another woo hoo goes to the CC community for having a civil discussion of politics. I know you were worried SC!

by silverstadium on Feb 5, 2008 2:08 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

re:
I'm of the opinion that politics have no real place on a sports blog, but the CC community has never disappointed me. Even when you guys clearly have serious disagreements, it stays clean. It's pretty rare, believe me.

Gone but not forgotten...

by SC on Feb 5, 2008 6:19 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

As Elvis woulda put it: Uh-thank-yuh,
thank-yuh-veruh-much. Yuh done good,  mah fren'.

Now, give us the scoop:

Is Rocky Cherry the newphew, brother, love child or what of John C. McGinley?

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001525/

http://oklahoma.scout.com/PictureGallery.aspx?PlayerId=37013&Title=Rocky%20Cherry

Forget it, Jake. It's Birdland.

by Titov on Feb 5, 2008 3:53 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

the resemblance is striking...
If Susan Sarandon and John C. McGinley had a love child, then the child would probably bear a striking resemblance to Mr. Cherry.  But alas, Sarandon is happily married to Tim Robbins.  
Rocky Cherry, O's pitcher, not John C. McGinley's love child.

by birdman on Feb 5, 2008 4:19 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

he also looks...
like he likes to bro' up w/ jamey shields and burn a couple.
So, I said, uh, lama: how about a little something for the effort?

by jq higgins on Feb 5, 2008 5:01 PM EST to parent up   0 recs

His expression might be defined as
"attempting to appear normal until the officer [trooper, security guard, grandparent] departs the immediate area."
Forget it, Jake. It's Birdland.

by Titov on Feb 6, 2008 12:16 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Thanks!
Also, I won my town 55%-44%. Fuck yeah.
"It would behoove the Orioles to play better." - Jim Palmer

by 2632 on Feb 6, 2008 11:48 AM EST to parent up   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The SB Nation blog covering the Baltimore Orioles.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

11405642_small
The state of the shortstop
Pooh_small
Markakis Extension Update Part 2
Orioooles_palmer_small
Red Sox sign Tazawa
Small
My top 5 Orioles prospects
Small
Olson for Pie rumor
Small
The interest in Adam Dunn is non-existent...
Small
Addition to the front office.
Pooh_small
Markakis Extension Update
Small
Wieters autographed bat to benefit domestic violence shelter
Small
Mussina at Camden 8/22/08

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini


Cobra Commander

Gijoecobra_small SC

Dreadnoks

Oriole1_small zknower

109531462_dfb593e7ba_m_small 2632

4fgfgjfxe30x64uwibpb59rg9_small Stacey

Animal-picture-baby-duck-taminsea_small duck

Crimson Guard

Stormshadow_small birdman

Orioooles_palmer_small Baltimo

Img_0666_small NawlinsOriole

ad

Site Meter