Hillary vs. McCain a better shot at a Dem win?
Hillary says she’d have a better shot at winning than any of the other Dem candidates if McCain is the Republican choice. Do you agree?
Rated:
“If our nominee is running against someone with the legendary background of John McCain — Democrats need to think about this,” Clinton said. “Because we’re picking a nominee we expect to win. We cannot take four more years of more of the same.”
I noticed there are a lot of Obama fans on here. Do you have any doubts about his ability to hold his own with McCain?
Do you think it’s more important to vote your ideals or to vote for the candidate in your party with the strongest change of winning. Are those one and the same for you?
Do you think strategically when voting, possibly picking the lesser of evils based on who you think will win, or do you vote only based on your political beliefs in relation to a candidate?
Side note—the article mentions that McCain is 71. Don’t know much about presidential ages. Is this on the older side?
Sorry only site members can participate in this discussion
You raise some very good questions here. Currently, I’m an Obama supporter although, watching the debates, I’ve been going back and forth between him and Clinton a little bit. My honest choice is Obama for a few reasons but mainly because I think he’d bring the most change to the table. I agree with Orin that his health care plan is not that impressive, but I don’t think Hillary’s plan is either. I think Clinton has the best chance against McCain, though. I have to say, I think voting for the Dem candidate who has the best chance of winning is most important here, although in any other election I’d probably say otherwise. McCain is sounding more like Bush everyday and that scares me. I know he’s trying to win the Republicans over, but still. And 71 does seem old for a president to me. McCain’s a year younger than my grandpa was when he died, so that’s how I look at it.
I have no doubt that Obama would do better against McCain because of the following reasons.
1) He doesnt CRY when the going gets tough or a even little emotional. Gimme a break! Clinton DOES NOT HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO LOOK LIKE A STRONG WILLED LEADER IN THE FACE OF SERIOUS NATIONAL DEFENCE ISSUES.
2) The GOP has already gotten bountiful array of the negative skeletons from the closet on the Clintons and their-
- Shady—Shady past. They wont have to do as much research etc … Its all been done already.3)Clinton obviously plays the role of politicle back talk, In other words in stead of answering the question, lets make sure the answer pleases my lobbyist freinds and and cannot be held against me at a later date. So talk about something else completely that really goes nowhere in hopes that everybody still likes me later.
Meanwhile the audience is holding their head wondering what the hell was that. Did she answer the question? This is the politics as usuall that Obama talks of.
4) She has vendetas and lots of enemies that would not vote for her just because she is she (including me). She is an antagonist that has NO support from the GOP or many independant voters. Obama has an ability that she does not and thats a genuine fresh start at attempting to reach out to all Americans and he IS doing this, where she is not. She has something to prove and people to please, He does not.
How many other members of congress has she essentially kicked in the shins and will not bend over to work with her? She comes across in her dealings in a lot of the same ways that Bush has. Either your with me or your against me. We all know how well that works.
I cant believe that there is any question who would be more capable of beating McCain.
The only one telling us that it is she that is more capable is HER or her CAMPAIGN.
Obama’s line on this is pretty much that, unlike Hillary, he never voted for the bill that opened the way to the war in Iraq, and that his clean record of voting against the war makes him the better candidate to go toe-to-toe with McCain on that issue. I think there is some truth to that.
To unify his base, it looks like McCain is going to have to make the war in Iraq central to his campaign. Many conservatives don’t like the “maverick” McCain because of his immigration and campaign finance reform positions and also, in my opinion, his willingness to cross the isle.
We’ll see where the country is in 9 months, but at the moment I’m not so sure a candidate can win by supporting a continuation of the war.
On other issues, I think either democratic candidate will do well against McCain. Immigration might be the exception, but I don’t think McCain will be bringing that up if he can avoid it because it will serve to erode his own base.
And on the issue of strategic voting – I’m strictly against it. Vote your conscience.
I agree you should always for your conscience, strategic voting ends up helping to elect leaders who are unprincipled and while lesser still evil. Obama would bring a much needed opposition to the Iraq War and issue that would be lost on a McCain against Clinton race. Clinton voted for the war plain and simple. Even now she is in practice and principle a supporter of the war. Clinton maybe be attempting to play both sides but she is a Hawk just like McCain. We need real change in Washington, personally I support Ron Paul and will do so until the convention, but I believe Obama is a voice of change and hope. Obama offers something Clinton lacks principle and conviction. I am afraid Clinton would say or do anything to get elected.