It looks like for non-evengelical Republicans, except for Chuck Norris types, a Clinton win is the best of all worlds. Not that Obama is a radical or anything but he is certainly less predictable than Hillary, particularly when it comes to the war machine.
The Clintons looked hackish. They had mad Madeline, Wesley Clarke and Bill in the background. She pandered to the unions and spoke in pablum. Huckabee was clearly from a different planet. A populist in the Republican party. A dude that speaks like Gary Bauer will have a limited reach, he's a serious reactionary when it comes to social concerns. And what of his organization nationwide? That's the question for Obama also but he has the benefit if lots of money from the limousine liberals.
BO and Huckabee were the most visionary in victory. Barack looked Kennedyesque. His kids did not look propish, even though he trotted them out there, they waved like John Jr. and he had the masses behind him, even though there was a barbudo in the back. BO doesn't seem to scare los blancos. He gave a great speech. The question is whether the hillbillary organization and money can win it for her in the long.
David Brooks' take.
Greatest line so far in the coverage:
"-Josh Marshall on Ron Paul, whom Fox News is excluding from its New Hampshire debate this weekend: “Seems Ron Paul has pretty much smoked Rudy in Iowa. With about 2/3 reporting, Paul’s got about 10% and Rudy’s bringing up the rear with a healthy 4%. Will Fox let him debate?”
No comments:
Post a Comment