Thoughtful article from the Wall Street Journal on the Democrat primaries.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1202...n_commentaries
Quote:
I ruminate in this way because something is happening. Mrs. Clinton is losing this thing. It's not one big primary, it's a rolling loss, a daily one, an inch-by-inch deflation. The trends and indices are not in her favor. She is having trouble raising big money, she's funding her campaign with her own wealth, her moral standing within her own party and among her own followers has been dragged down, and the legacy of Clintonism tarnished by what Bill Clinton did in South Carolina. Unfavorable primaries lie ahead. She doesn't have the excitement, the great whoosh of feeling that accompanies a winning campaign. The guy from Chicago who was unknown a year ago continues to gain purchase, to move forward. For a soft little innocent, he's played a tough and knowing inside/outside game.
|
Quote:
Mrs. Clinton is stoking the idea that Mr. Obama is too soft to withstand the dread Republican attack machine. (I nod in tribute to all Democrats who have succeeded in removing the phrase "Republican and Democratic attack machines" from the political lexicon. Both parties have them.) But Mr. Obama will not be easy for Republicans to attack. He will be hard to get at, hard to address. There are many reasons, but a primary one is that the fact of his race will freeze them. No one, no candidate, no party, no heavy-breathing consultant, will want to cross any line--lines that have never been drawn, that are sure to be shifting and not always visible--in approaching the first major-party African-American nominee for president of the United States.
|
Quote:
The Democrats continue not to recognize what they have in this guy. Believe me, Republican professionals know. They can tell.
|
Meanwhile a recent edition of Rolling Stone I was leafing through today had an editorial from
Matt Taibbi (an awesome "alternative" political journalist) that both Democrat candidates are essentially the same, shallow set of political tripe, and that they are fundamentally indistinguishable in terms of actual policy.
Edit: 2nd article
here.