would you vote for Barack Obama?

[Jennifer.Bush]

Barack Obama is unlikely to get a better chance to run for president

FOR a technological dinosaur, the book-publishing industry is having a stellar political season. The bloggers may type the night away, but it is good old-fashioned book-writers who are driving the political debate.

And nobody more so than Barack Obama. The junior senator from Illinois has deftly used the publication of his new book—“The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream” (Crown)—to stir up a frenzy about a possible presidential run. In recent weeks, he had already made the covers of two big magazines—Time (“The next president”) and Men's Vogue. Then on October 22nd he admitted that he had “thought about the possibility”, and would make his final decision after the mid-terms. Since then it has been all Obama all the time.

This is bad news for lots of Democrats with less exotic names. Several pundits have pronounced the Democratic primary a two-horse race between Mr Obama and Hillary Clinton, which is overstating things. John Edwards is strong with the grassroots; Al Gore is a still-rumbling volcano. But Mr Obama, who is 45, has transformed the race, jumping over greybeards such as John Kerry and giving the Democratic Party its biggest shot of excitement for years.

Mr Obama's not-quite-declaration is especially bad news for Mrs Clinton. The junior senator for New York has spent the past six years—some would say nearly six decades—buffing her presidential credentials. She has supported the war in Iraq to prove that she is “tough enough”, made nice with her Republican tormentors and hoovered up Democratic money. And now a mere greenhorn, who was marking law papers when she was co-running a “two-for-the-price-of-one” presidency, has shoved her out of the limelight.

What makes this all the more galling for the Clintonistas is that one of Mr Obama's most obvious advantages is that he is not Hillary. Mrs Clinton comes with a pantechnicon full of baggage. (What exactly has Bill been doing to amuse himself in New York these past few years, for example?) Mr Obama, by contrast, is fresh-faced and, so far as we know, baggage-free. Nor is he above offering a gentle reminder of what people disliked about Clintonworld. “When I was a kid I inhaled,” he said bravely this week. “That was the point.”

welllllllllllllllll

 

[OCA]

welllllllllllllllll

He's a Dem so that would be a big fat no. If Jesus himself ran as a Dem i'd vote against him.

 

[Avatar4321]

Nope. definately not. Id have to see some really pathetic candidate against him to even consider it.

 

[Jennifer.Bush]

He's a Dem so that would be a big fat no. If Jesus himself ran as a Dem i'd vote against him.

that's why? i would think the fact that he has done nada is congress would be the answer

 

[Stephanie]

that's why? i would think the fact that he has done nada is congress would be the answer

1. No because he's a Dem...

2. No, because what you said above...

Both in that order...

:usa:

 

[OCA]

that's why? i would think the fact that he has done nada is congress would be the answer

He's a Dem so even if he's there for 30 years he still can't do anything possibly good that is unless he suddenly becomes a conservative Republican.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Maybe if he was to run against Satan. Or worse yet, sHrillary.

But I'd have to think about it a bit.