Hillary

clinton.gif

Tom Toles – Washington Post

At first, nobody expected a serious challenge to her campaign, calling her nomination “inevitable.” Then she placed third in Iowa and it seemed as though Obama was the nominee.

Last night, she narrowly beat Obama in New Hampshire, confounding predictions that it was Obama who had the momentum to win there.

As a U.S. presedential race junkie, I recently subscribed to MSNBC to get my fix in 2008 and I had forgotten how big the U.S. networks go at times like this. Her loss was read as the collapse of her campaign with words like “freefall” and “shambles” thrown about. Pundits confidently predicted that Obama was the next nominee.

For five days between Iowa and New Hampshire, that was the story. Now, her campaign is “bouncing back” while Obama is trying to figure out “what went wrong.”

Maybe people are just impatient with the primary process as it churns through the 24 hour news cycle. Maybe they just want to be told who the nominee is already. Problem is, there is a primary season to get through and at this point, we really don’t have an idea who it may be just yet.

As a Canadian, I know that my preference for a candidate is irrelevant but I’d like to see it be Obama, mostly because the U.S. will have gone through 20 years of Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton. That’s a little nuts. Obama’s inexperience doesn’t bother me so much because I’m sure he would, like the current president, surround himself with experienced people. Besides, George W. set the bar so low for a president, that I can’t imagine how anyone would do worse.

It’s a psychological thing, really. For America to move forward, it could benefit from electing a guy with a background that’s outside the norm of U.S. politics. But it’s all just symbolic, really.

But I think for Obama to be seen as president, people need to take a leap of faith. Clinton, on the other hand, has been working toward this since she was First Lady when it was clear that she had ambitions beyond lighting the White House Christmas tree every year. People can easily envision Clinton in the White House. With Obama, that vision is less clear and that is perhaps why a crucial single-digit percentage of voters did not support him last night, instead, throwing it to Clinton (or, if they’re independant voters, McCain).

There are more primaries to come and it’s still anyone’s race. We’ll see what the voters really want in due course.

Advertisements

One thought on “Hillary

  1. I’ve really enjoyed watching it this time around. As much for seeing how it will play out as for variation in their combination of ideologies. Especially on the Republican side. Like Huckabee is a religious conservative, but liberal on foreign policy.

    Part of me almost thinks that since both races are so even and contested with a candidate on each side who could be considered independant, that a pluralistic election (I can’t remember the real term) could be the best thing. An election much like the Iowa caucus where all candidates, Republican, Democratic, and Independent, all run against each other and the lower percentage people keep dropping off until you are down to two or three candidates. Then you either have a head-to-head election or one where everyone votes for their first and second choices. Either way you are sure that a majority of the people will have voted for the person in charge.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s