'08, The Race So Far

Like I said before, I'd be perfectly fine with a Clinton presidency... heck, after 8 years of this, almost anything would do.


The only thing I fear right now (and the more it seems possible the more my stomach churns) is that Giuliani might actually make it to the White House. My sense is that this would be the worst of all possible outcomes... I believe it would not only continue but accelerate the disfigurement, initiated by this current bunch, of a country I (and much of the world) so admire(d).


If it absolutely has to be a Republican, (and I hope it doesn't) the truth is I'd be fine with Romney... having someone who'll say and do whatever it takes (and flip... and flop...) to remain high in the polls would, at this juncture, be a welcome relief after this period of arrogant, stubborn and ideologically driven let future historians be the judge brand of hubris.


Mike Huckabee has also had a strange inexplicable appeal to me since the beginning of this marathon... for a religious guy who doesn't believe in evolution!!! ...I really hope he does manage to become the standard-bearer for the evangelical / social conservative wing of his party and maybe secure second billing on the ticket. (as it seems he may be on his way to achieving since this weekend's Iowa straw poll.) I find his brand of "I’m a conservative — but I’m not mad at anybody over it" rhetoric to be frankly refreshing (and much healthier) than the vitriol we've been accustomed to from that end of the spectrum for the last two decades. Here's an interesting nyt piece about him


But let's hope the GOP gets banished to the wilderness for a while... it needs to find itself ...or re-invent itself. My hope would be that it re-emerges as an updated, 21st century version of the hopelessly anachronistic brand of liberty based politics currently represented by Ron Paul. (I really like him, he appeals to my libertarian sensibilities. And he is reminding Republicans what they used to be about... but come on, the man wants to go back to the gold standard for Pete's sake!!!)

But we can all feel it, can't we? The near future belongs to the Dems, this next contest is truly the theirs to lose. And the real question on the minds of most Americans right now (the ones paying attention) is: Clinton or Obama?



In a Washington Post interview published this morning, Obama reminds me why, as a French-Canadian observer of American and world affairs who cares about where things are headed, I have such hope that he ends up in the White House:

He then challenged Clinton for accusing him of being "irresponsible and frankly naive" after he said he was willing to meet with leaders of nations such as Iran, Syria, North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela without preconditions.

"Senator Clinton apparently disagrees with me on this issue of preconditions," he said. "I think she's wrong on that because if we continue to set preconditions for discussions that are hostile to us, I think that's what loses the PR battle worldwide because it implies the United States is the superior power and other states have to give in to our demands before we even deign to meet with them. And that reinforces the sense of the arrogance of U.S. power around the world, which is a source of great damage -- and makes us less safe."

Though I tend to agree with what he's saying, conventional wisdom suggests that, in American politics at least, this is a very risky, if not suicidal, position to take. It can be defended as a sound strategic position (and Obama is doing a decent job of that) but I find it a hard sell, seems to me it's not self-evident to most people. And he's opening himself up to all kinds of easy accusations of being a naive lefty paecenik... and enables Clinton to position herself (as she brilliantly seems to be doing) as the "safe" steady conventional (almost conservative) choice...

But then again, I have a growing sense that conventional wisdom is fast becoming an obsolete commodity... the landscape is changing... and not just in the U.S. Everywhere I look these days (including here at home) it seems like traditional constituencies are up for grabs like I've never seen in the 20 years I've been following politics. Almost every recent election in a western country these last couple of years has been one with a strong component of change... often defying the formulas and predictions of pollsters and pundits relying on the past to analyse the present. (That goes for me too)

Obama is betting that the 'center' in American politics has moved and that, humbled by the lessons of Iraq, it is now in sync with his views on questions of war and diplomacy. A bold assumption, I find. But my sense of things comes from the filter of MSM talking heads and 'beltway-centric' bloggers. I don't really have a good sense of actual feelings on the ground.

My hope is that Mr. Obama does.