OBAMA WINS IOWA!!!!!!!!
So, who's inevitable now? Iowa may not be representative, but if a Black man with the middle name of Hussein can win in a state that's 97% white, well that whole issue of viability just went up in smoke. This is simply historic. Barack Obama has won in Iowa.
At last count it is:
- 37% for Obama
- 30% for Edwards
- 30% for Clinton
Now it's on to New Hampshire next Tuesday. Like Iowa Clinton and Obama have been neck and neck, but this really gives Obama momentum. But what is most compelling is Obama's strength among Independents and Younger voters.
According to CNN Entrance Polling, Barack Obama carried 57% of voters 17-24, and 42% of voters 25-44. Hillary did poorly in both categories , doing best among Senior Citizens. I do think this says something. If the Democratic party wants to continue winning in the future it needs to listen to its younger voters, many of whom are Independent.
So, onward to victory in New Hampshire
Comments
I totally agree with what you said ab out the speech. I posted this before watching the speech. Everyone said this was the best speech of his career. Now some will try to say that we need "experience" not "soaring "rhetoric", but if we want experience, Joe Biden or Chriss Dodd are the better choices. They've been around forever. But the people of the nation I do think want to be inspired. They want to hear a word of hope. And of the candidates in the field, GOP or Democrat, only Obama has that ability.
A while back you commented about his problems with debates. What I heard last night from one of the commentators was that Obama doesn't like debates because they force him into 30 second soundbites. Hillary is the master of the 30 second sound bite, but like a preacher Obama needs room to soar,and when given the room he can do it well.
When Bill Bennett is impressed, you're on to something!
And as for experience, remember a one term congressman from Illinois who went on to become by most people's estimation the greatest of America's presidents, then perhaps experience isn't all that it's supposed to be. perhaps what we need is a person who is able to rise to the occasion!
Now I'm writing too long a post!
I am backing Edwards over Obama because substantively Edwards is the more progressive candidate and I choose substance over symbolism. But I can't deny the power of Obama: Of what it will mean to America's self-identity if we elect a global citizen of mixed race to the highest office in the land.
I didn't buy the Clinton "experience" line--which would have belonged better to Dodd or Biden or Richardson. But I do worry that Obama's actions don't live up to his vision and rhetoric of hop: He was against the war from the beginning, but has not worked very hard in the Senate to end it. (Dodd has done more.) He rightly criticizes Hillary for voting for Kyle-Lieberman on Iran, but absented himself from the vote--when Dodd, Biden, and others could have used his help in trying to kill it.
And there are many other such examples. Obama is inspiring--but I hope he walks the walk more instead of just talking the talk.
Like you, Bob, I am old enough to remember "White's only" signs (though the civil rights revolution was already ongoing when I was born) and this is the world I dreamed I would live to see.
Whether or not Edwards can "recover" from 2nd place in Iowa remains to be seen. He can definitely keep going long enough to keep pushing Obama to be more progressive and not so cautious--maybe even to get him to pull out ALL troops from Iraq, not just "combat troops" and leave the rest there past 2013!
Still, at least the nation did not choose to go with the dynastic machine in Iowa. Hillary lost for all the reasons I said she would. If she loses NH, too, her "inevitable" narrative crumbles and we get to try to forge a new America.pzyhdna