kswheels
(142 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 06:48 AM
Original message |
Endorsing at this point... |
|
Is like placing a bet in the 4th quarter of the Super Bowl when the score is 35-7. Anyone who endorses now is a pathetic bandwagon jumper, and Obama doesn't need them.
|
mucifer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 06:54 AM
Response to Original message |
1. I do think Colin Powell would be big for either side. |
FlyingSquirrel
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 06:57 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Hmmm not sure I agree with that metaphor |
|
McCraps can still steal this and the 'refs' are crooked. Two and a half weeks is still plenty of time for something to change the momentum and get it within stealing range. I trust NOTHING about our electoral process at this point.
I'll take the endorsements.. every little bit helps and we need all the insurance we can get. Each endorsement makes it that much more difficult to pull off a steal because it creates a feeling of inevitability and an expectation of an Obama win by more people.
|
H2O Man
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 06:58 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Respectfully disagree. |
|
At this point, each campaign is targeting two groups: (1) the remaining "undecided" voters; and (2) those who are not fully committed to their party's candidate.
General Powell's endorsement is significant in that context. His support of the Obama campaign will: (1) convince many "undecideds" that Obama is qualified to serve as Commander in Chief; and (2) grant permission to moderate republicans to vote for Obama.
|
kswheels
(142 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 07:00 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. I don't think undecideds really exist at this point... |
|
...but maybe that's just me.
|
H2O Man
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 07:04 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
It would seem that the choice between the two tickets is so stark, that it would be impossible for anyone to be "undecided" at this point. Yet, as in every presidential election in the past 80 years, there remains a significant group of people who remain "undecided" at this late date.
In each of the three presidential debates, we've seen every poll showing that Obama is winning them over, at about a rate of 2 to 1. Still, about 1/3 of those who were "undecided" have yet to commit to one ticket.
|
karynnj
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 08:08 AM
Response to Original message |
6. It depends who does the endorsing - there are many respected Republicans who would be big news |
|
Colin Powell is being mentioned, but consider the impact if it were a Senate Republican. Leiberman did help McCain to some degree with his early endorsement, but it was less significant given that he lost the Democratic nomination in 2006. Imagine the impact if a Republican, in good standing, endorsed Obama. The one most mentioned is Hagel, who opted not to stand for re-election (his wife endorsed Obama). That would be big as he is part of the Republican caucus with McCain.
Even bigger would be Lugar, a died in the wool Republican, who (like Hagel) is on the SFRC with Obama. He and Obama sponsored the nuclear proliferation bill. Lugar endorsing Obama over McCain would, given how close it is, give Obama Indiana.
|
Mike Daniels
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. I think Hagel's wife is the best we're going to get from him |
|
Since she's not in power her endorsement is pretty meaningless as far as the public is concerned. It just means that Hagel's wife is allowed to differ publically from her husband.
I think Powell and Hagel are of the mind that if McCain wins they may still have a future in politics even if they don't actively endorse him.
However, there's no way the Democratic base will allow Obama to appoint either Hagel or Powell to a position in his administration. Consequently, endorsing Obama publically doesn't really benefit either of them professionally. They may vote for him in the end but they'd never announce it.
|
karynnj
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
11. I doubt the Democratic base would fight Hagel as Secretary of Defense |
|
Hagel was one of the few Republicans who in early 2007 voted for military budget with a timeline in it. With Obama making the over all decisions, I know I would have no problem with him as defense secretary. Clinton picked Cohen, who was a Maine Republican Senator.
For Powell, it could be a way to help erase the blot that he himself sees on his record from having been used by the Bush people in the run-up to the war.
|
CatBO
(713 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 08:17 AM
Response to Original message |
8. Sure, but this will be when the fun people come out... |
|
The people who would rather be associated with the winners than the losers. I expect there will be some intriguing endorsements today.
|
palintology
(252 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 08:20 AM
Response to Original message |
9. It would be nice if Nancy Reagan would endorse Obama ... |
|
I think her son Ronald and her daughter are both democrats ?
|
Mike Daniels
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. It would be but it's not likely to happen |
|
Nancy's a "my party, right or wrong" type of Republican. She may occasionally make a statement the makes it look like she may break away but she always supports the party candidate in the end.
|
barack the house
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 09:35 AM
Response to Original message |
12. I think we all get by with a little help really, it can't hurt. |
scheming daemons
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Oct-17-08 09:36 AM
Response to Original message |
13. You're wrong.... it can be the final nail in a campaign's coffin. |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 05th 2024, 04:01 PM
Response to Original message |