Hey, zeke. A Question.

Jeebus, we are parsing here.

He's made this point numerous times before on the stump.

He isn't interested in playing the 50 percent plus one vote game. He wants the Democratic party to be a big tent. And yes, that includes the middle, which very much does exist, especially in a state like Iowa.

What's the problem, again?

I swear, sometimes the refrain from some on the left ought to be, "We don't want to win elections, we want to be Democrats!"

 

I haven't followed this thread much, just to drop an occasional pointless comment. But it started with what I think is the main problem facing Obama. Young voters seem to eat up his message, not really caring if it's practical, while older voters seem to sense that, when it comes right down to it, he just doesn't have what it takes to be president. I think that's what ultimately will prevent him from winning the nomination. I think it's too much too soon for Obama, and, apparently, many of those on the other side of the spectrum do, too.

 

Did older folks view Kennedy in this same light?

Granted, Kennedy had time in Congress that Obama does not have, but nowadays, his lack of Congressional experience seems to be viewed by some as his biggest attribute -- nothing to hang him by.

 

Apparently, "too much too soon," means "Up seven in Iowa on the presumptive favorite."

Now, as to an age divide -- at least in the Democratic primary -- I agree that it exists, though disagree completely on the reasons for it and the ramifications of it.

But hey, let's just keep doing what we've been doing. Hillary v. Romney will be ever so exciting.

 

If it's Hillary v. Romney, I'm not fucking voting for President. I'll just stick to Congress and local shit.

 

Ditto. But hey, It's Their Turn.

Fuck that noise.

 

But it's not to a good number of older voters, FH. To what extent that trumps the younger voters' influence remains to be seen. I do think, however, the caucus system in Iowa isn't going to be a good reflection of that. I think it's gonna take a few big primaries to see that division play itself out.

EDIT: Easy, Zeke, I know Obama is your boy. You're normally a rational poster on political threads. But you're starting to come off a little fanboyish.

 

I don't know what was fanboiish. I'm pretty rational. Obama ain't the second coming. He isn't my favorite politician. I'm not thrilled that he's closing in Iowa by slipsliding to the right.

That said, I am beyond tired of fighting the baby boomer's culture war by proxy every four years. And I'm not the only one. And the thought of having to choose between Mitt Romney and Hillary Clinton for president makes me want to vomit. Those are the two best candidates in America? I understand that nobody's perfect, especially not politicians, but, seriously, is that the best we can do?

As to your point about younger voters, you have it exactly backwards -- if Obama, and Edwards, for that matter -- can get young voters out to a complicated party event like a caucus over Christmas break, logic would tell you they have at least as good a shot at getting them to do something as simple as vote in a primary.

 

But they can't put months and months of effort into getting voters who are notoriously undependable out to the polls. I just think the message may fade as the primary season rolls along.

 

And the voters won't have eight options, either.

If Obama wins Iowa, Edwards is done, leaving him ALL of the Anyone But Hillary vote.

 

Back closer on topic, Dennis The K asks Iowa supporters to make Obama their second choice -- essentially telling them to vote for the Senator.

Welcome aboard, sportschick! (There's free Fat Tire. But don't tell. We don't want the bandwagon to get overrun. Yet.)