Last Night's Presdiential Debates

I watched the presidential debates last night , including the GOP portion as part of my "know your enemy" approach to politics. I am not going to say who won or lost any of the debates because in many ways they seemed to be a draw. However, Romney took a real pounding and deservedly so, and Huckabee clearly came across as the GOP candidate who is the best speaker and outwardly the most relaxed (the two may be interrelated). Of course, part of Huckabee's relaxed state may be due to his belief that God is intervening on his behalf since God wants him to be president.

On the Democrat side, I think Hillary failed to do any real damage to Obama and came just shy of looking peevish a couple of times - something that will not help her image issue on likability. Edwards definitely came across as impassioned and in a number of ways was supportive of Obama's position. Obama seemed to manage to fend off Hillary's attacks, so it will be interesting to see what the next round of polls shows.

One big factor working behind the scenes that was noted by the Democrat candidates and also in the Daily Kos (http://www.dailykos.com/) is the difference in tone between the GOP candidates for the most part and those for the Dems. The negative versus positive feeling coming from the two groups is markedly obvious. Likewise is the GOP's failure to recognize issues that are truly important to everyday Americans. Moreover, a Kos noted:

[T]he GOP has people who alienate Latinos and minorities, and treat 9/11 as a vehicle for personal gain. We have campaigns that bring out new people to vote. I think I'd rather be on our team than their team. And I think we're about to see that America would, too.

The 2-1 turnout for the Democratic caucuses in Iowa seems to lend credence to this concept. Hopefully, the GOP will continue to be oblivious to the concerns of most Americans and remain focused on the check list provided mostly by the party's lunatic Christianist base.

The Electability Issue

As Andrew Sullivan notes today concerning the U.S. presidential election, one big issue is that of electability (http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2007/12/the-electabilit.html). The Washington Blade has endorsed Hillary, but from my prior years in the GOP, I think people are very much underestimating how much she will motivate Republican voters if she is the Democrat nominee. Rightly or wrongly, she sets off harsh reactions and will make some GOP voters go to the polls and vote for a candidate they do not like rather than let Hillary win. It is not rational, but it is a reality that must be factored in. In saying this, I am not saying that I do not like Hillary on some issues, but if she cannot win, then we have all been tilting at windmills and will have four more years of GOP nightmare. Personally, I do not think I or the country could take another four years of GOP control of the White House.

While I have not fully made up my mind on Obama, some of the polling makes him appear perhaps the more electable candidate in a general election, which is what ultimately matters. The figures from a new Zogby Poll (http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1404) are informative:

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama would defeat all five of the top Republicans in prospective general election contests, performing better than either of his two top rivals, a new Zogby telephone poll shows. His margins of advantage range from a 4 percent edge over Arizona Sen. John McCain and a 5 percent edge over Arkansas’ Mike Huckabee to an 18 percentage point lead over Mitt Romney of Massachusetts, the survey shows. Against New York’s Rudy Giuliani he leads by 9%, and against Fred Thompson of Tennessee he holds a 16 point edge.

Democrat Hillary Clinton of New York would defeat Romney by a narrow 46% to 44% margin and Thompson by a 48% to 42% margin. She would lose to Huckabee 48% to 43%, to Giuliani 46% to 42%, and to McCain by a 49% to 42% margin. The data suggest that Clinton has improved her position slightly.

Democrat John Edwards of North Carolina would beat Romney, Huckabee, and Thompson, but would lose to Giuliani and McCain, the Zogby survey shows.

Other polls show Independents also more likely to vote for Obama over Clinton. For real change to come about, the GOP needs to suffer a crushing defeat in 2008. The other intangible outcome of an Obama presidency would be the message to the world: A black American with an Arabic middle name as President would blow away many stereotypes. Domestically, it would show once and for all that black Americans do have opportunities if they will but take them. Ditto for every other minority. I believe he also would be best able to usher in the winds of change that are so desperately needed. Internationally, it would make detractors of the USA in both Africa and the Middle East have to rethink their anti-US spin and admit that the "American Dream" of opportunity for all is still real and that it is not just propaganda. That would be remarkable. Am I am idealist at times? Yes, I confess that I am.

Clinton, Edwards and Obama agree to participate in historic debate on LGBT issues

As PageOneQ is reporting, the agreement of three presidential candidates is a first time event in this country. No doubt the fundies will be foaming at the mouth and say all sorts of things about these candidates appearing on Logo. Here are the highlights:

Three leading candidates for the Democratic nomination for president will appear at a live, televised forum according to a statement released by the Human Rights Campaign. Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and former Senator John Edwards have agreed to appear at the event focusing on lesbian and gay issues. The event will be broadcast on LOGO, a cable TV station owned by Viacom. The station is a division of MTV Networks.

The event will take place August 9th at 9pm EST and will be broadcast live on television and via streaming video on line at LOGOonline. It will be hosted by co-panelists HRC president Joe Solmonese and musician Melissa Etheridge.