As I'm sure that you have noticed, Hillary Clinton is trying to sell us this lie that Obama doesn't have any ideas or solutions and yet in the same breath claims he has stolen her ideas. She can't have it both ways. Which one is it Mrs. Clinton? And if they both has similar ideas, which they do then what is the difference between the two?
He represents true change, a fresh face, an inspirational orator, a more electable candidate who has cross-over appeal into the Independent voting block as well as some Republicans. He seeks to run a mostly positive campaign while she has been and continues to try and drag him into fights and mud-slinging. It looks desperate and nothing turns off an electorate more than playing dirty and negative attacks.
Is it really a good idea on her part to criticize a record turn-out and support of a Democratic candidate by an inspired youth? Does she really want to disillusion them and risk them turning away from her if she wins the nomination and campaign in the general election? I don't think it's smart of her to slam every other demographic that supports Obama (the more educated, the African American community, the youth) and basically say that the blue collar Democrats tend to favor her are the only real, true Democrats. She is hitting everyone hard that doesn't support her and in doing so keeps painting herself further and further into a corner. Obama is doing the opposite, appealing to everyone and building a diverse and strong coalition. He wants to include and she mostly wants to isolate, divide and conquer. She seems to be willing to destroy the party just so long as she wins the nomination.
Other than her similar ideas as Obama's she has nothing else to bring to the table other than pessimism, the same old politics, a less chance of being elected in the general and a controversial figure who carries a lot of negative baggage that would unite a factored, less popular Republican party. Do we liberal and Democrats want to win in November and move the country forward in a new direction or do we want to get mired again in the mud of the controversial, divisive Clinton years?
As for solutions, every presidential candidate has a reservoir of ideas and solutions or else they would've been discovered as one dimensional, not serious candidates from day one of their entrance in the race. She also is throwing this desperate net out there that Obama is all talk and that talk is cheap. Well then doesn't that cut both ways? It's obvious that he has ideas and solutions so then who is the one talking cheap and in an insincere manner? They say we project onto others our own weaknesses. So if that is the case then we can't help but come to the conclusion that this accusation of Obama is nothing but cheap talk and empty rhetoric on her part.
Then there is this still stale claim that she is a better manager than Obama and that because of that she is better capable to lead on day one. Well I think that we can get a good idea of each candidates management style by the way that they are running their campaigns. Obama has run a well oiled machine from the beginning whereas the Clinton campaign has made miscalculation after miscalculation. She blew off the caucuses from the start and then whined that they were disadvantaged by the caucus system but only after they started to get spanked by Obama in them. As if we are supposed to feel sorry for her and give her another chance. She was beat by Obama's superior ground strategy and knows it.
In addition, she hasn't been able to keep track of her funds and manage a budget within her own campaign so what does that say about how she'll handle the particulars of a federal budget? It also shows that she isn't as capable of running a well balanced and smooth operating administration. To that end she can't keep control of her advisers and we keep hearing of reports of infighting and resignations. Is this the kind of chaos that we should expect from a Clinton administration from "day one"? I think it shows a lack of judgment on her part in being able to put together a well balanced, competent and professional team.
That all being said, however, I'd like to return to the idea that Obama has no solutions. Take the FDR like National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank to rebuild America's crumbling bridges, cracking highways and aging dams. Is that not a solution? It will create new jobs and invest back in America rather than investing in China's infrastructure and economy. I guess that isn't a solution to a vital problem facing us.
This is just one idea and solution that is easily found through one search with Google to find Barack's website that easily lists his ideas and solutions to vital problems in America.
Gallop Poll Shows Obama Lead Nationally Widens:
PRINCETON, NJ -- For several days, nationwide Democratic voters' preferences have been shifting toward Barack Obama in Gallup Poll Daily election tracking. Now, the Illinois senator enjoys his first statistically significant lead, 49% to 42%, over Hillary Clinton, according to the Feb. 13-15 results. Additionally, the 49% support for Obama represents the high point for him in the daily tracking program.
The tracking data reflect the Obama momentum since the Feb. 5 Super Tuesday primaries, moving from a +13 Clinton advantage in Feb. 3-5 polling to a +7 Obama lead in the latest results.
---End of Transmission---