As David Gergen has just pointed out, the margin of victory means a lot here. MONTANA?!? OK, it hasn't been called yet but just the fact that it hasn't been called yet is meaningful. I don't think you can explain Montana without starting with this: Obama has the power to persuade. And I have a strong feeling he will use that to accomplish some incredible things.
at some point, he had to cut the "hillary cord." he's been abundantly gracious towards her in mentioning her at every turn, every rally, every speech, etc., crediting her with "making history," "fighting for working americans," etc. yes, her support was key to unifying the party, but ultimately, this was about the voters choosing barack obama. i, for one, think it totally appropriate that there was no mention of hillary.
I am so happy! Ayden said "da, da!" when he heard the news (I think he is excited, too).
Re: Hillary. I don't think it was necessary to mention her explicitly last night (although she did deliver PA and OH for Obama). I'm sure he will work closely with her as part of his cabinet or Supreme Court (fingers crossed!). But I think last night was his night. And I feel like he did acknowledge the accomplishments of Hillary indirectly when he talked about how far our country has come.
Maybe Ayden thinks he has a black daddy? Yeah. I hear what you are saying about Hillary. I don't think he needed to devote a major portion of his speech to her. Just at least add her name in the list of people who contributed to his campaign. BUT, please don't get me wrong. The speech was amazing, the night was amazing, and the historic significance was amazing. But it wasn't all about him and that is what was so refreshing. It was about the American people and the call to service from this point forward. It was about honesty and humility and him saying 'you may not like me and we may not be able to get it all done in a year or even in the first term...' It was nothing but a minor point--though I don't believe he would have had such a wide margin without her. Again, I think the world is a totally different place this morning and I couldn't feel better about bringing a new life into this world now that things have finally changed.
I will love seeing you guys snipe at each other for a change now that you're in power. He didn't mention Hillary! He isn't supporting gay marriage! We're STILL in Iraq!
While I rue the coming months of gradual slavery, I will enjoy being the loyal opposition.
Remember this giddiness, my friendly devotees of the state. You won't be this happy in 12 months. Guaranteed.
I will agree that he is a very persuasive speaker, however. That did more for him than Hillary ever did.
no offense to hillary (or her supporters), but she best serves the country right where she is at, in the senate. the same reason that the nominating process chose obama over hillary is the same reason that she had no place in last night's speech and it is also the same reason she should not be on the court or in the cabinet: she is too polarizing a figure. she's to be admired for all that she's done, don't get me wrong, but there are just way too many people out there that viscerally react to the mere mention of her name. justifiable or not (i would argue not, but that is actually beside the point), that has become an inextricable part of her brand: polarization. i think it would be a bad move on obama's part.
I see where you're coming from squid and the truth is, I don't know squat about Supreme Court appointments BUT her polarization factor is so much lower in any role that's not presidential candidate. Two months from now, it'll be Hillary who? She's smart as heck and knows the law and has nothing to get Borked over, except whitewater and i think that's been pretty well Borked out.
OUCH, Don! It's got to be more than a little embarrassing to wake up the day after you made such hateful remarks to see ALL the news outlets (FOX, even) talking about the bitter family feud in the Republican party.
The results of the election are much more embarrassing than any bickering by campaign staffers. The fact remains, however, that Obama has two choices. 1 - Disappoint the people on this blog by actually following through on his purple state rhetoric or 2 - please you and lose seats in Congress in 2012.
With the deification of the Obamessiah, he can only disappoint. That is why he laid the groundwork for failure by saying he may not accomplish his goals in one year or even one term. For sure, he will blame Bush, Republicans, corporations, and locusts for his shortcomings.
But he will disappoint you. Because he has to. Just saying.
Don, you old debater you ... we think Obama is the Messiah, he won't walk on water, therefore we will be disappointed. I disagree with your premise, agree with your whatever the next thing is called and disagree with your conclusion.
beg to differ, don. i will NOT be disappointed if obama follows through on the "purple" theme. in fact, that is exactly why i voted for him and that is what my expectation is. for me (and swarms of others i know who voted for him, including many lifelong repubs who switched over to vote for him), it is exactly the opposite of what you say: i will be disappointed if he doesn't follow through on the purple talk.
14 comments:
As David Gergen has just pointed out, the margin of victory means a lot here. MONTANA?!? OK, it hasn't been called yet but just the fact that it hasn't been called yet is meaningful. I don't think you can explain Montana without starting with this: Obama has the power to persuade. And I have a strong feeling he will use that to accomplish some incredible things.
Unbelievable! And to think Fred Armisen has a new path carved out for his entire career. We have loved him from day one.
Excellent speech...my only criticsm...no mention of Hilary?
at some point, he had to cut the "hillary cord." he's been abundantly gracious towards her in mentioning her at every turn, every rally, every speech, etc., crediting her with "making history," "fighting for working americans," etc. yes, her support was key to unifying the party, but ultimately, this was about the voters choosing barack obama. i, for one, think it totally appropriate that there was no mention of hillary.
I am so happy! Ayden said "da, da!" when he heard the news (I think he is excited, too).
Re: Hillary. I don't think it was necessary to mention her explicitly last night (although she did deliver PA and OH for Obama). I'm sure he will work closely with her as part of his cabinet or Supreme Court (fingers crossed!). But I think last night was his night. And I feel like he did acknowledge the accomplishments of Hillary indirectly when he talked about how far our country has come.
Maybe Ayden thinks he has a black daddy?
Yeah. I hear what you are saying about Hillary. I don't think he needed to devote a major portion of his speech to her. Just at least add her name in the list of people who contributed to his campaign.
BUT, please don't get me wrong. The speech was amazing, the night was amazing, and the historic significance was amazing. But it wasn't all about him and that is what was so refreshing. It was about the American people and the call to service from this point forward. It was about honesty and humility and him saying 'you may not like me and we may not be able to get it all done in a year or even in the first term...'
It was nothing but a minor point--though I don't believe he would have had such a wide margin without her.
Again, I think the world is a totally different place this morning and I couldn't feel better about bringing a new life into this world now that things have finally changed.
I will love seeing you guys snipe at each other for a change now that you're in power. He didn't mention Hillary! He isn't supporting gay marriage! We're STILL in Iraq!
While I rue the coming months of gradual slavery, I will enjoy being the loyal opposition.
Remember this giddiness, my friendly devotees of the state. You won't be this happy in 12 months. Guaranteed.
I will agree that he is a very persuasive speaker, however. That did more for him than Hillary ever did.
Supreme court -- forgot about that option. that would be kick ass
no offense to hillary (or her supporters), but she best serves the country right where she is at, in the senate. the same reason that the nominating process chose obama over hillary is the same reason that she had no place in last night's speech and it is also the same reason she should not be on the court or in the cabinet: she is too polarizing a figure. she's to be admired for all that she's done, don't get me wrong, but there are just way too many people out there that viscerally react to the mere mention of her name. justifiable or not (i would argue not, but that is actually beside the point), that has become an inextricable part of her brand: polarization. i think it would be a bad move on obama's part.
I see where you're coming from squid and the truth is, I don't know squat about Supreme Court appointments BUT her polarization factor is so much lower in any role that's not presidential candidate. Two months from now, it'll be Hillary who? She's smart as heck and knows the law and has nothing to get Borked over, except whitewater and i think that's been pretty well Borked out.
OUCH, Don! It's got to be more than a little embarrassing to wake up the day after you made such hateful remarks to see ALL the news outlets (FOX, even) talking about the bitter family feud in the Republican party.
The results of the election are much more embarrassing than any bickering by campaign staffers. The fact remains, however, that Obama has two choices. 1 - Disappoint the people on this blog by actually following through on his purple state rhetoric or 2 - please you and lose seats in Congress in 2012.
With the deification of the Obamessiah, he can only disappoint. That is why he laid the groundwork for failure by saying he may not accomplish his goals in one year or even one term. For sure, he will blame Bush, Republicans, corporations, and locusts for his shortcomings.
But he will disappoint you. Because he has to. Just saying.
Don, you old debater you ... we think Obama is the Messiah, he won't walk on water, therefore we will be disappointed. I disagree with your premise, agree with your whatever the next thing is called and disagree with your conclusion.
beg to differ, don. i will NOT be disappointed if obama follows through on the "purple" theme. in fact, that is exactly why i voted for him and that is what my expectation is. for me (and swarms of others i know who voted for him, including many lifelong repubs who switched over to vote for him), it is exactly the opposite of what you say: i will be disappointed if he doesn't follow through on the purple talk.
Post a Comment