About time someone did. This, from the CBS news blog(h/t: kos):
“I have not seen any evidence that she is better equipped to handle a crisis, he said. If the only criteria is longevity in Washington, then she’s certainly not going to beat John McCain on that. “
One of the things that I hope people start asking is what exactly is this foreign experience that shes claiming? I know she talks about visiting 80 countries. Its not clear, was she negotiating treaties or agreements or was she handling crises during this period of time? My sense is the answer is no.
Heh. Of course they are both less experienced than John McCain. Does this matter as much to Democrats as it does to Republicans? Byron York suggests that it does not.
A Washington Post/ABC News poll, finished a couple of weeks ago, asked Ohio Democrats to name the most important issue in their choice of a presidential candidate. Thirty-four percent said the economy and jobs. Thirty percent said health care. Nine percent said the war in Iraq, by which they most certainly meant a rapid withdrawal of U.S. troops. Three percent said ethics and honesty in government. Three percent said change. Two percent said education. And one percent said terrorism and national security. (The Post and ABC asked the same question in Texas, and the answers were similar; one percent named terrorism and national security as the top issue.)
Those numbers are supported by the experience of just walking around in Ohio. I ask a lot of people why they support, or dont support, Hillary Clinton, and no one tells me it is because she would be a better or worse commander-in-chief than Barack Obama.
The economy will be a major issue for both parties. The depth of the misery is debatable, but Republicans cannot afford to ignore the economy and talk about national security 24/7. Most voters aren’t single-issue voters, even though Republicans see national security as a primary reason to vote McCain over Hillary and Barack. McCain needs to show that he has an alternative plan to deal with the other concerns of voters, including health care and the economy. National security and the fear of liberals screwing up the country wasn’t a good enough argument in the ’06 midterm. It won’t be enough in November.
Tags: ’08 election, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John McCain
The depth of misery is debatable? Where have you been hiding? Look at the economic stats across the board. Unless you happen to be an executive at Exxon-Mobil, things have never – NEVER – been worse.
I’m going to stand by what I said in the post. The depth of misery is debatable, because personal experience varies and every one of us has a subjective view of how well they are doing in this economy. Some people are struggling, due to unfortunate choices or flat-out risky behavior. Either way, those people do not represent the majority of the US population.
I think it’s also a stretch to say that things have never been worse. There’s no gas rationing. There are plenty of jobs for illegal immigrants, so there must be enough for Americans once we start controlling our borders and enforcing our laws. As for health care, adding government control, more programs and a increasingly massive bureaucracy to an already broken system is not the right way to fix the problem or to reduce costs. The solution the Democrats have is wrong.