So far, it seems that Barack Obama has the upper hand in the polls.
But this election seems too close to call!
1) Many on the Left will blame only one thing if Obama looses - Racism!
Unfortunately, we have a bunch of dummies on the Far Right who still believe Obama is the "closet Muslim", and thinks that Obama wants to "oppress the whites". We also have a bunch of dummies at McCain-Palin rallies shouting racist crap at African-American reporters!
There are concern that some European-American union voters (usually Democrats) have racist feelings and wouldn't vote for a black guy, no matter what! This is especially a concern in swing states in the Midwest!
But for some on the Radical Left, any criticism of Obama is considered "racist". Even those who (gasp) express criticism of Obama's proposed policies!
You can't even call Obama a "liberal" without being called a racist!
Obama was accused of "palling around with terrorists"! Those accussations were considered "racist", but the terrorist was European-American Bill Ayers, who planted bombs in federal buildings in the 1970's.
Joe the Plumber was slandered as "racist" for saying that Obama was "tap dancing" around his question like "Sammy Davis Jr.
THAT'S NOT RACIST!
What, if John McCain was being evasive about a question, I can't say "he swam around my questions like Micheal Phelps" or else I'll get called "anti-white?
If you're one of those who call every non-Obama voter a racist, would you vote for African-American conservatives like Allan Keyes, Clarence Thomas, or Condaleeza Rice?
2) Some talk about the Bradley effect, referring to the former mayor of LA, Thomas Bradley (who happened to be African-American) who was ahead in the pre-election polls when he ran for governor of California in 1982, but lost the election!
Some say "some pretended to be for Bradley, but in the privacy of the voting booth, they voted their prejudice, and against Bradley"
But his opponent exposed the fact that crime was increasing in LA during Bradley's term as mayor. Also a handgun-ban initiative was on the ballot which Bradly supported. That got many who either 1) sometimes liberal but isn't for gun bans, or 2) non-voting but owns a gun to vote against Bradley.
Let's not forget that Bradley's career was destroyed in 1992 because of the LA riots. Bradley was still mayor, and people felt he lost control of the city, and that the police wasn't adequately prepared for a large scale riot! He even lost support of many African-American voters at that point!
It's likely, in the case of Obama, many are skeptical of his tax policy, foreign policy, etc, but don't want to admit it because people might then ask "are you against him because he's black?" even if you're only questioning his policies! So they remain silent!
Or in some cases, Obama skeptics might get called "Uncle Toms". I mean back in the primary, the African-American politicians & activists who supported Hillary Clinton were called "race traitors" and in some cases, even threatened!
Kathleen Parker says a "reverse Bradley effect" might happen! Those in conservative areas might want to vote for Obama but are silent because then they might be asked "why are voting for that Muslim?" or "why are voting for that (n-word)?". So it's possible that many Obama supporters in conservative areas are pretending to support McCain, but in the privacy of the voting booth, end up voting for Obama
http://jewishworldreview.com/kathleen/parker102208.php3
Parker was the same conservative writer who expressed skepticism of Sarah Palin's readiness to be Vice-President. She ended up being accused of being a "closet liberal" and recieved threatening emails!
3) Some say Obama is a Radical Leftist because he associated with Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright and other left-wing extremists!
I think Obama, like other politicians, panders to whatever can help him at the moment.
When he ran for office in Chicago, he felt he had to pander to Ayers, Wright, etc. in order to get votes.
He felt he needed to support handgun bans when he was an Illinois senator!
Now that he wants to be President, he disassociated himself from those left-wing extremists and now says he's against handgun bans!
McCain isn't guilt-free on pandering. In 2000, when he was trying to be the Republican nominee for President (which George W. Bush end up winning), he pandered to South Carolina racists by not taking a stand on the issue of the Confederate flag on state grounds. Months later, McCain later said he was against the Confederate flag but didn't express it when it mattered in the primary election, because he didn't want to loose.
Afterwards, after loosing to Bush, he wanted the image of a "guy who rebels within the Republican Party". He was the "liberal's favorite Republican" So he voted against Bush's tax cuts.
But guess what? To re-take the Republican Party, McCain flip-flopped! Now he's a big tax cut man!
So both are politicians who pander!
4) Now on to policy!
On economics, Obama said he'll cut taxes for 95% of Americans and give many tax credits to those people.
Being that I'm one of the 95%, I'll be happy!
However, McCain pointed out in the debates that the Obama wants to increase corporate taxes. He also pointed out that the US has a corporate tax rate of 35%, whereas Ireland has a corporate tax rate of 11%.
McCain is right that a lower corporate tax rate is good in bringing more investments.
However, McCain wants to tax health benefits! Wrong Move!
5) Joe Biden (who had a long reputation for saying stuff without thinking it through) mentioned that foreign enemies could test Obama in his first months!
The irony is that Biden is Obama's running mate! If McCain-Palin said it, they would've been accused of "fear mongering"
It wouldn't matter, any new president is going to get tested!
Bill Clinton was tested when the World Trade Center blew up early in 1993, whereas Bush was tested by 9/11 in his first year!
So regardless of who's president, something's going to happen in 2009! I just hope North Korean nuclear missiles can't reach Hawaii!
6) My previous blog post talked about the Internet and how recent it is!
McCain has admitted he doesn't know how to use the Internet by himself!
At his age, he's been an adult LONG before the Internet became popular (around 1996), so the thought is "if I spent so many years without it, why would I need it now"
McCain defenders said "he can't type because his hands were severely injured during his POW days". If that's true, can McCain hold a pen?
7) My 2004 predictions came close to true!
Here's what I said in 2004
http://pablothemadtiger.blogspot.com/2004_11_01_archive.html
From my Nov 8 post under #5
For the GOP, the results show that from now on, they'll need their Presidential candidates need to be from Texas (like Bush) or Arizona, Nevada, Colorado, Florida, New Mexico or Utah. Why? Because a politician from those states would have experience speaking to both white conservative voters AND Latino voters.
So, yes the GOP chose an interior West guy in 2008. I just didn't expect McCain. Back then, McCain was known as the guy who rebels against his own party. I didn't expect him to take over!
As for the Democrats, they'll need someone from the Midwest. There, the politicians will have the experience of talking to union voters, inner city African Americans, college-town liberals and traditonally conservative rural voters. Barack Obama fits that profile, but I think he needs to serve a full-term in the Senate and win re-election to prove that he is capable of being elected President. Either that or run for governor of Illinois if that seat opens up. Either way, it can help Obama be the 1st African American President.
Obama didn't need to serve a full-term, and he's the one the Democrats chose!
8) Earlier this year, I mentioned that because Bob Barr was the Libertarian Party this year, I won't vote Libertarian for President!
http://pablowegesend.blogspot.com/2008_05_01_archive.html#1589278334887116242
AS I researched the other 3rd party candidates (Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney, Bob Barr, and Chuck Baldwin) I am now resorting to choosing between McCain & Obama! Choosing between the Big 2 parties wasn't something I wanted to do in 2000 & 2004, but now it's the only thing I have left, not because of anyone's chance of winning, but the 3rd party guys are even worse!
