Hills vs. Hill
In accordance with our quaint homespun practice of amplifying the electoral power of remote hill-dwellers, here’s Dixville Notch. CNN:
The first ballots were cast in Dixville Notch, a hamlet of about 75 near the Canadian border.
People there favored Sen. John McCain in the Republican primary — he got four votes — and Sen. Barack Obama in the Democratic contest, who won seven votes.
Obama and McCain also won in midnight voting in Hart’s Location, population 42. The two senators hope to see those results duplicated statewide by the time all the votes are cast.
The last polls close at 8 p.m.
Leading up to the primary, the top contenders were scrambling to nail down supporters among an electorate notorious for its independence.
Obama worked to turn an apparent boost in the polls after the Iowa caucuses into a second victory over his leading rivals, Sen. Hillary Clinton and former Sen. John Edwards.
And McCain expressed confidence that he would win the day’s Republican primary, a contest he won during his first White House bid eight years ago.
CNN notes key issues of “hope” and “change.” I hope things don’t change too much, because while there is always a lot of tinkering around the edges that might improve this situation or that, this remains one of the wealthiest nations in the world, providing all its citizens and a lot of non-citizens opportunities to advance themselves unmatched anywhere else in the world; the nation most seriously committed to the social welfare of all by means other than burdensome, motivation-killing socialism; the nation most seriously committed, having bled and paid heavily on this score, to equality and protection for all in matters of race and religion; and whether the rest of the free world likes to admit it or not, it relies on us to ensure its security. The “hope” and “change” mantras in such a privileged country frankly sound like adolescent whining.
Driscoll, in the Agony and the Obamacy, re the metaphysical capacity of Obama speeches to elevate without informing.
MVDG at Poligazette suggests a look at the Euroview. Here’s a roundup at Der Spiegel Online: the Siegfrieds, singularly unimpressed with “hope” and “change,” tend Hillward. In the event that you care what Europe thinks, No Pasaran slices, dices Euroviews re our superpower status.
In case you missed it, here’s the “Hillary exit talk” item from Drudge yesterday. No doubt there has been talk, highly unlikely that’s happening before Feb 5. Unless the Dixville, Hart’s Location 0-for-Hill result is repeated across the Granite State.
Speaking of hope, change and Hill, here’s NYT’s Caucus on Hill to Obama, you’re no JFK/MLK, as well as some awkward assassination remarks.
Riehl: “Either she’s nuts, or she’s taken the Bill as the first black president nonsense to heart.”
Surber on Steinem’s Hill defense: it’s not that he’s black, it’s that he’s not a girl.
OK, enough crying over spilt estrogen. Down to business. Tigerhawk: Markets like Obama, McCain as nominees.
Here’s someone as yet not swept away by a couple of precinct results. Thomas Sowell, RCP:
The next biggest story is that no one in either party won a majority. It is still a wide-open race in both parties.
…
With all the media attention to the various political rivalries in both parties, it is easy to lose sight of the fact that all of this is ultimately about choosing a President of the United States.
The question of what kind of President each candidate would make is infinitely more important than all the “horse race” handicapping that dominates the media.
By far the best presentation as a candidate, among all the candidates in both parties, is that of Barack Obama. But if he actually believes even half of the irresponsible nonsense he talks, he would be an utter disaster in the White House.
Among the Democrats, the choice between John Edwards and Barack Obama depends on whether you prefer glib demagoguery in its plain vanilla form or spiced with a little style and color.
The choice between both of them and Hillary Clinton depends on whether you prefer male or female demagoguery.
Among the Republicans, there are misgivings about the track record of each of the candidates, especially those who have shown what Thorstein Veblen once called “a versatility of convictions.”
Not always fairly or accurately, he proceeds to take apart the GOP candidates. No question, however, it will be a nose-holding election on the right and looks to be a hope-snorting one on the left.
Prior campaign, Clintonia:
(Not Quite) President Huckabee
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 9:26 am on Tuesday, January 8, 2008
4 Responses to “Hills vs. Hill”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
January 8th, 2008 at 10:40 am
[...] Crittenden has a good post up about the hope and change phenomenon, especially in light of Obama’s sudden surge and [...]
January 8th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
I’m wondering if we’ve exchanged Hillary’s “inevitability” for Obama’s “inevitability”.
In any case, while the primaries aren’t exactly irrelevant, all the pundits should have learned by now that they can’t predict what the American public will do when it comes down to crunch time.
January 8th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
The real, and only, change that Democrats are interested in is changing the party in control of the Executive branch.
January 8th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
“I’m wondering if we’ve exchanged Hillary’s “inevitability” for Obama’s “inevitability”. ”
Either way RebeccaH, its going to be “Camelot”.
Better get used to it.
I’m a white, bald, straight, married male who has a job and served in the military. So at best, I will either be a taxation cash cow for whatever special interest they decide to subsidize, or a social whipping post for whatever special interest they decide to pander to.