July 9, 2007
· Filed under campaign strategy, democrats, religion, republicans, the issues
When you think of religious voters, what party affiliation comes to mind?
It’s certainly not Democratic. Hillary Clinton, like other Dems, has realized that the Republicans have had a hold on the religious demographic for far too long, and is trying to change this. Obama has already been talking more openly about the role his Christian faith plays in his life for a while now, and it seems Hillary is now following suite.
The New York Times recently featured an article about Hillary’s faith. The article states that Hillary’s new religious overtures just might work to win over centrist voters, but will do very little with religious conservatives. Some of the tactics that Hillary is trying include talking about her faith (ie, how she carries a bible with her when she travels), hiring Burn Strider, an evangelical christian to do religious outreach, and speaking to religous opponents of abortion to show her respect for their stance, while still being a firm supporter of abortion rights.
So how is the public reacting? Read the rest of this entry »
June 25, 2007
· Filed under Bill Clinton, corruption, democratic nomination, democrats, republicans
For those of you who ready Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball (political analysis/election predictions), you will have noticed that he recently wrote an article entitled “The Hillary Dilemma.” He concludes that although Hillary’s credentials outweigh the other candidates’, making her seem like the strongest candidate in the field, she would actually be the weakest nominee for the Democratic party.
Like Clintonfan42, I think that many of Sabato’s points are weak in his analyis. First, he states that any Democratic nominee this election can count on inflated, if grudging, electoral support because the republican party has managed to dig itself deeper and deeper into an Iraq and scandal-lined hole over the past eight years. However, he then says that “The final several percent of swing voters needed to get Hillary Clinton over the top in the general election will vote for her only with the greatest reluctance, more as a way to stop a Republican than as an endorsement of her.” Is this really a problem for the Democratic party? Clearly, the best candidate would be, as Sabato says, a ‘unifier’ able to bridge the growing partisan divide, one that would sweep swing voters off their feet during the election, and encourage productive cooperation across the aisle once in office. I just think that’s wishful thinking. The Democrats can’t produce a candidate like that right now, and counting the inability to generate a wave of good feeling for the party as a particular weakness of Hillary’s is a misplacement of criticism. Read the rest of this entry »
