Wojtek Sokolowski
[WS:] I think you are wrong on this, Charles. Obama is a stronger candidate than Clinton for several reasons, such as being a new face and thus the Right not having as much ammo against him than against Hillary, that he seems to have an overaching vision for the future (no matter how shallow it may appear to some) whereas Hillary has the usual liberal laundry list of issues without an overarching vision, or that there seems be a lesser prejudice against a male in the top boss's seat than against a female in that seat.
^^^^^ CB: Well, my discussion is somewhat one or two dimensional - race and sex - and I think it likely that some of the other factors you mention influence some peoples' decisions. Also, basically, because Obama is using "race doesn't matter" rhetoric, my compliments to the white voters for him are somewhat mild, or they are just not being racist. In other words, the white votes are not for him because he is Black like the Black votes. In other words, it's a mild non-racism. AND voting colorblind means that other issues are used to decide. For some , the other issues impacting their vote are unfortunately sexism, as dawned on me yesterday ( duh ). But that's not the only issue that impacts the colorblind voting. So, anyway, I can see how for many, Obama has some pluses, including some of what you mention above maybe. I don't think most people are debating the two health care plans as we do here. Most people are just not that astute, if that's not too self-congratulatory for the list. This is the point that I don't think Dwayne's concern about other issues besides race and gender that are the focus of importance for progressives - health care, war, environment, etc. - are determining factors as to who will win : progressives aren't being fooled and the great mass who are not progressives are not deciding based on those issues.
So , in sum, it is difficult for me to drop attention to race and gender as historically very powerful determinants , but since both race and gender are intertwined as a historical first as well because there are both a woman and Black candidate, thereby confounding their normal dynamic , even negating each other some as with sexism trumping racism or vica versa, sure other factors as you mention may become more important relative to gender and race.
So, it becomes difficult to say who would be stronger. Actually, on historical habit, I'd still predict that McCain would beat either of them. How's that for pessimism of the intellect ?
And to add more complications, doesn't Clinton have to pick Obama for VP and doesn't O have to pick C for VP, thus making it more likely that McCain will beat either one because sexism and racism will both hurt the Dems in November with a woman/Black or Black/woman ticket ? ( smile)
^^^^^
I talked to a number of liberals who voted for Obama, and most of them gave the exact same reason behind their vote - Obama stands a better chance than Hillary against McCain. In other words, it is the urgency of geting rid of the Repugs than any sexist or racist motives, as you seem to suggest.
I personally care about two things - health care and the environment/land use (Iraq and foreign policy is a bipartisan issue, and thuse irrelevant in this context). I think that neither Obama nor Hillary are saying much about environemment/land use beyond the standard American crap "we want to keep our cars and suburaban homes, but we want to pay less for fuel, especially to those damn foreigners" (my translation of the greater fuel effciency and independence from foreign oil spiel.) As far as health care plan is concerned, they both are very similar, but Hillary talks about mandatory enrollment, which I like better because it it means universal coverage (it is not possible to achieve universal coverage of anything without coercion!).
But what the candidates promise, and what will happen after election are two different things - so those subtleties are not very relevant now. The only issue that matters now is who has a better chance in November. I think the answer to this question is Obama, but if you disagree, I would like to hear why.
Wojtek