What Obamacons really think...

[elfs]

There are times when I really wish that the Republican and Democratic parties had switched their nomination rules. If the Republicans had used the proportioning rules and the Democrats had gone with winner-take-all, the race today would be Huckabee vs. Clinton. That would have been something to watch.

I would have angsted up until election day, at which point I would probably have held my nose with one of those big metal office clips and voted for Clinton.

At this point, it all comes down to The Supremes. It really does.

Comments

Things would've been different

[(Anonymous)]

If the rules had been different, the candidates would've campaigned differently. Obama won in large part because he focused on smaller states, while Clinton was focused on the big ones (I wonder if the rumors that Mark Penn was unaware of the proportional system are true? It's hard to believe but it's consistent with the approach he took).

If it had been winner-take-all, I think Obama still would've won. He would've taken a different approach, and his campaign was generally much more effective than Clinton's.

[doodlesthegreat.livejournal.com]

What about Gladys Knight and The Pips? Don't they get a say, too?

[heofmanynames.livejournal.com]

I fail to see what role SCOTUS plays in any of this - or are we having a Diana Ross moment?

[elfs.livejournal.com]

I actually don't have that strong opinion about the two candidates, although I clearly like Obama better than McCain. But then I liked Huck better than McCain or Obama. Both are constrained by Congress, and Democratic presidents have often been more obesient toward his role' as executive and not emperor.

But given the health of two of the Justices, who common wisdom holds have been holding on to their seats long past they wished to retire just because they didn't want to give this president a hand in naming their successor, I don't want McCain to have that authority either.

[heofmanynames.livejournal.com]

DOH! (*smacks self in head*)
Yes, of course, I quite agree - though I have no confidence in Huck's "likability", I do confess he IS perhaps the MOST likable of all the candidates; however this - and dissembling - are part of the standard preacher's toolkit.

Suggesting - as Huck did - that we should modify the Constitution in order to make it match the current PMD/EE interpretation of the Bible - puts him well outside the circle of acceptability, even as a VP candidate.

CLEARLY, however - given the number of ideological SC appointments that have packed the Court since the Nixon era (tho he oldest member was appointed by Ford), it would be a great evil IMO if *any* Republican got to fill any of the next 4 openings....

Just in passing, may I say how proud I am of the US Senate for roundly defeating the nomination of that toad, Bork?