02-13-2008, 03:01 AM
Wave to end White House family ties <b>
"For the first time in a long time, we are seeing someone who can wash away the cynicism from politics." These words were spoken yesterday by Chris Beutler, the Mayor of Lincoln, the state capital of Nebraska, after watching long lines of men and women, most of them white, wait to vote.</b>
On Saturday, by a decisive majority in three very different states, Democrats voted for the man who may be able to wash away cynicism, Senator Barack Obama, to be their presidential candidate. He won in snow-bound Washington state, he won in Louisiana in the deep south, and he won in the rural heartland of Nebraska. It wasn't close. Obama crushed Senator Hillary Clinton in all three contests.
The status quo fractured at the weekend. Something new is welling up from the body politic. I think it represents the beginning of the end of an era of dynastic politics. Will America vote for Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton? Two families that would control the White House for 24 consecutive years? Something stale and static emanates from this possibility and I don't think the American people are going to let it happen.
I think Obama will go to the Democratic convention in Denver in August with the highest number of delegates. He is already raising more money than the Clinton campaign, more momentum, and far more excitement. When Clinton lost in Washington yesterday, she lost in a state where the governor is a woman and both the state's US senators are women. But she lost Washington by a resounding two to one majority.
A year ago, Clinton was the prohibitive favourite to win the Democratic presidential nomination, with a massive war chest, a national organisation, universal brand recognition, the support of the union movement, a strong base in the Senate, and millions of women wanting a woman to be president for the first time.
All this has not proved enough. The only factor that has kept Clinton in the lead has been racial animosity. African-Americans and Latino-Americans do not like each other. Their voting in this campaign has conformed to this reality. While Obama has won the overwhelming majority of the black vote, Clinton has won the overwhelming majority of the Latino vote.
In Washington, the commentariat has attributed the Clinton campaign's dominance of the Latino to the "goodwill factor", a legacy of the presidency of Bill Clinton and his support of the free trade pact with Mexico. This is partly true and mostly rubbish. It is not the goodwill factor but the ill-will factor that has split the Democratic vote so cleanly on racial lines.
"For the first time in a long time, we are seeing someone who can wash away the cynicism from politics." These words were spoken yesterday by Chris Beutler, the Mayor of Lincoln, the state capital of Nebraska, after watching long lines of men and women, most of them white, wait to vote.</b>
On Saturday, by a decisive majority in three very different states, Democrats voted for the man who may be able to wash away cynicism, Senator Barack Obama, to be their presidential candidate. He won in snow-bound Washington state, he won in Louisiana in the deep south, and he won in the rural heartland of Nebraska. It wasn't close. Obama crushed Senator Hillary Clinton in all three contests.
The status quo fractured at the weekend. Something new is welling up from the body politic. I think it represents the beginning of the end of an era of dynastic politics. Will America vote for Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton? Two families that would control the White House for 24 consecutive years? Something stale and static emanates from this possibility and I don't think the American people are going to let it happen.
I think Obama will go to the Democratic convention in Denver in August with the highest number of delegates. He is already raising more money than the Clinton campaign, more momentum, and far more excitement. When Clinton lost in Washington yesterday, she lost in a state where the governor is a woman and both the state's US senators are women. But she lost Washington by a resounding two to one majority.
A year ago, Clinton was the prohibitive favourite to win the Democratic presidential nomination, with a massive war chest, a national organisation, universal brand recognition, the support of the union movement, a strong base in the Senate, and millions of women wanting a woman to be president for the first time.
All this has not proved enough. The only factor that has kept Clinton in the lead has been racial animosity. African-Americans and Latino-Americans do not like each other. Their voting in this campaign has conformed to this reality. While Obama has won the overwhelming majority of the black vote, Clinton has won the overwhelming majority of the Latino vote.
In Washington, the commentariat has attributed the Clinton campaign's dominance of the Latino to the "goodwill factor", a legacy of the presidency of Bill Clinton and his support of the free trade pact with Mexico. This is partly true and mostly rubbish. It is not the goodwill factor but the ill-will factor that has split the Democratic vote so cleanly on racial lines.