Obama Wins!

Ed.: Because the blogs have been slow, and because this is a hot topic, I’ve fudged the date on this to appear to have been published two days later, so it will stay on the main page a bit longer.

Obama LogoIt looks like Obama is the Democratic nominee, while Hillary Clinton, the woman who has twice alluded to Obama being assassinated (okay, the first time was a speaker at her event, not her), has conceded that she’d be open to running as his VP.

I’d be happier with an Obama-Richardson ticket, but people are calling Obama-Clinton the fastest way to try to heal the wounds this election cycle saw. In her defense, if she doesn’t get him assassinated, she’d make an excellent VP.

Needless to say, I’ll be watching the news tonight for what may be two very historic speeches: Obama’s victory speech and Hillary’s concession speech. (It seems like it was just weeks ago that Obama gave his “concession speech” that was anything but a concession speech, in New Hampshire, which led to the Yes We Can Song.)

The AP story is hot off the press, and many MSM outlets aren’t carrying it yet. Whether that’s because the polls don’t close for two hours, because it’s not factual, or just because MSM isn’t as obsessed with checking Google News as I am remains to be seen.

Update: It seems that Hillary hasn’t conceded quite yet. Honestly, I’m not sure how the AP is so sure that Obama’s won yet.

Update 2: USA Today has a good piece suggesting that, while Obama might do it tonight, it’s still about 30 delegates premature. And they also have this good article on exactly how the AP story was put together.

Update 3: You can follow the whole Google News thread.

7 thoughts on “Obama Wins!

  1. I am not convinced that having Clinton on the ticket is a good idea. The worst thing that could happen is for her to be VP. It would be like Jefferson being Adams’s VP. Sounds like a dream until you realize that Jefferson worked hard to undermine Adams and to secure his own election after one term. (For context I like Adams more than Jefferson)

    I’m also not sure it would help the ticket. The winning ticket will have to appeal to the middle and Obama and Clinton are both hard left in most people’s books. Well in the books of most people who are right of center.

  2. I’m right with you — I worry that Hillary is going to scare away the center and undecideds, who have some sort of profound hatred for her.

    Strictly from a Utopian, if-I-called-the-shots perspective, I think Richardson would be excellent. He’s a former UN Ambassador, has tons of foreign policy experience, and is a governor. He’d have been good as President, and I still think he’d complement Obama very nicely. Oh, 2004 DNC chair. Seriously, this man needs a Cabinet position, if not the VP slot.

    That said, I’m having a hard time coming up with anyone I’d consider a moderate Democrat. Actually, I’d consider most everyone a moderate Democrat, with the far-left Democrats being people like Kucinich. (Err, maybe I just mean far-out, not far-left.) But I’m having a hard time coming up with anyone that I think the center/right would think was a moderate.

  3. Actually, Wes Clark might be a decent running mate, too. A ridiculously well-decorated military commander, he’d be a wise choice when McCain keeps trying to imply that Obama knows nothing about the Iraq war.

  4. I think it is clear that the only reason Obama didn’t win by a lot more was that there are Democrats (these were Democratic primaries) who will not support a black president. This surprises some people for some reason. It doesn’t surprise me. Disappoints perhaps but not surprises. Racism is why Clinton thinks she is more electable. I think she is wrong BTW. I do not think she is more electable. But I don’t think gender is the big factor. I think personality is. The woman could come out tomorrow for an end to abortion, reduced gun control and support for the whole Republican platform and even if I believed her I couldn’t bring myself to vote for her.

  5. While I’d love to sit back and chalk it all up to Obama being rejected because of racists, I think it was a lot more complicated than that. I don’t doubt for a second that there are racist Democrats just like there are racist Republicans, but I’m not so sure racism was the main factor.

    I was initially skeptical of Obama, who seemed to have no experience. I looked deeper and realized that he’s been volunteering his life for public service for decades, and also came to see that “rotting” in the Senate for decades doesn’t necessarily make someone a good leader. But I think that, if I hadn’t looked deeply enough, I could have easily been convinced that Clinton was the better candidate.

    I think personality is.

    You and me both.

  6. Heya Matt.

    The two real things that I would worry about with an Obama/Clinton ticket is one, assignation (viable option to get a women into office) and two, VP power.

    Especially not knowing what Dick’s legacy is going to be, putting someone like Clinton into that office might make a serious difference to the Obama administration.

Leave a Reply to Mr T Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *