I believe the Democratic candidate is likely to thrash John McCain, no matter who it is. Hillary Clinton would beat Senator McCain handily, mainly because of Senator McCain. He has tied himself to this Iraq War and is telling anyone who'll listen that he plans to stay in Iraq for another hundred years. It's hard to imagine a more unpopular position to base your campaign on in the general election.
Though Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton would score easy points against McCain on this count, Obama has an advantage here. Sen. McCain can turn around and accuse Sen. Clinton of being just as complicit in the drive to war because she also voted for the resolution that authorized the Iraq War. Whereas, Obama can say McCain showed poor judgment in going into Iraq in the first place and McCain has no defense to that. He could argue that the Iraq War has gone great, and I hope he does. Good luck with that strategy.
Why would Democrats want to neutralize this obvious advantage they have by picking a candidate that also voted for the war?
Secondly, the right-wing base is very displeased with John McCain. Conservative talk show hosts, pundits and bloggers have spent the last couple of months pummeling McCain. The only thing that can re-energize them to back his candidacy is -- Hillary Clinton.
Now, this is a little unfair to Sen. Clinton because I don't think she has done anything to earn that animus. She's polarizing only because they have spent the better part of two decades attacking her and her husband, and trying to turn the American people against them. Barack Obama might seem polarizing after eight straight years of right-wing attacks, too.
However, fair or unfair, the right-wing can't wait to go to war against Hillary. On the other hand, if it's Obama versus McCain, I think they might dislike McCain more. This has got to be a major liability when you are trying to rally your own side in a general election.
Finally, according to the polls, voters are overwhelmingly in favor of change this election cycle. If Obama is running, he is clearly the candidate of change. If Clinton is running, McCain could almost make an argument that you would get more change from his presidency than you would under another Clinton administration. I think that argument would be wrong, but why open the door?
Overall, Democrats can make it easier or harder on themselves this year by picking one of the two remaining candidates. I'm confident they'll win either way, but why take the risk? Obama is the better candidate to run against McCain, who looks like he is going to be the Republican candidate in the fall. By picking Obama the Democrats can make a strong and persuasive case that there is only one candidate who can bring real change to Washington -- Barack Obama.
Watch The Young Turks Here
Young Turk's Blog Roll
Featured Bloggers
 | Ada Calhoun |
 | Ben Greenman |
 | Dinesh D'Souza |
 | Jeff Hoard |
 | Mo Rocca |
 | Young Turks |
RSS Feeds
Resources
The Young Turks
Report
The Young Turks, hosted by Cenk Uygur and Ben Mankiewicz, airs on Air America Radio... read more
Obama More Likely to Beat McCain
Posted Feb 5th 2008 12:02PM by Cenk Uygur
Filed under: Young Turks, John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama
Filed under: Young Turks, John McCain, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama
Top Tags
Most Popular Stories
Most Commented On News Bloggers
Recent Comments
- Ryan Anderson on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Sheryl on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- Antonio Apostol Jr. on Obama and the Reagan Doctrine
- andreawalker419 on Breastfeeding an Eight-Year-Old?
- bob on Parents Put Baby Up for Sale on eBay
- Darin on Are Father-Daughter Purity Balls Really Christian?
- Clif Kuplen on Sarah and Katie: The Secret Language of Popular Girls
Top News Headlines
Ada Calhoun |
Ben Greenman |
Dinesh D'Souza |
Jeff Hoard |
Mo Rocca |
The Young Turks |
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 47)
1. Republican woman senior here - voting for Barack - I have had enough of the Bush/Clinton dynasty! I admire Sen McCain but am against the war - it is time to consider future generations.
Ping at 9:35AM on Feb 2nd 2008
2. I think Hillary Clinton will have the easier time beating McCain. 1. Obama has linked himself to the far liberal wing of the party. 2. The extremest who you say will vote to defeat her will do the same to her. 3. The right leaning media is obsessively trying to get Obama the endorsement with totally biased coverage which I believe shows they think he is more beatable than she is. 4. People want a reasonable, moderate Democrate to start solving domestic issues and to get us out of the war and that's Clinton. Making a speach in your state legislature is political rhetoric with no respnsibility attached. McCain will make mincemeat of that argument.
Smb at 11:31AM on Feb 2nd 2008
3. living among mainly staunch Republicans, it amazes us the pure hate these people have for the Clintons. As such it is our belief that should Sen. Clinton be the nominee, every Republican, even those who don't vote all the time, will come out of the woodworks to vote against her. Jeanne
jeanne at 11:45AM on Feb 2nd 2008
4. I believe that Clinton or Obama would beat any Republican because it's the Democrats race to win. But of the two Democrats, Obama is the one most like;y to win. He brings new life into the White House, and he has no ties to anyone. Politics are strange, but the same in many ways, especially when a person needs a favor. They would rally to receive a favor for Barack Obama, because they have now idea which he would lean. Do you want someone who would win the argument, are someone who would end the fight. Clinton might win the argument, but Obama would end the fight. There would be less fighting between the two parties if Obama is at the helm<
James Harris at 12:18PM on Feb 2nd 2008
5. The USA needs a leader with expiriance not one that knows very little of the rest of the world!some who understands the coplexity of the human race!
George at 12:19PM on Feb 2nd 2008
6. I'm voting for the person who will be the best President and that involves several factors, not just the war, the economy, gas prices, taxes, illegals, drugs, health insurance, terrorists, business management, military, infrastructure, morality, arrogance and dishonesty just to name a few. When you look at all of the tasks facing a President, it's pretty easy to eliminate the light-weights. Without naming names, looking at the candidates out there, do you see any undertrained, underprepared and inexperienced lightweights? I certainly do. There are a couple of one issue, one trick ponies running for president.
Bill at 12:20PM on Feb 2nd 2008
7. By far Obama will whip McCains butt! As much as I like McCain as a man, his ideals are as old as he is! And considering he will choose Rudi to run with is just iceing on the cake for the dems! Besides many conservitives will never bring themseves to vote for McCain, unless Hilary, then they will hold their nose and vote McCain.
cjjanis001 at 1:00PM on Feb 2nd 2008
8. some folks say the black folks only want ABAMA because he is a young man of color! well I say his motive to be President of the U.S. is one that says to many there is time for a change. In my opinion a change would be both parties agreeing on two things THE WAR and ECOMINICS and right now OBAMA says no more money going for war we must look at taking care of our own. Including the soldiers who will be coming home. maggie N.Y.
margaret at 1:49PM on Feb 2nd 2008
9. Young Americans that sounds better
Chris at 1:56PM on Feb 2nd 2008
10. Both of the democratic candidates are total pipe dreams and have no chance of winning in red states. This recent headline from a rival news site pretty much sums up the democrats chances, "Obama or Hilary? Snoop Dogg Torn". I can't believe how out of touch the dems are. The party has been hijacked by wide-eyed, dreamy idealists. In order to win the presidency, any dem who runs will have to win red states to win the presidency. It's simple math really. The dems are more concerned with making a statement than winning. I call it the "Ralph Nadar Syndrome". Rather than nominating viable candidates who can compete in battleground states, the dems plan on squandering their nomination in order to say they nominated the first African-American or first female candidate. What country do dems think we are living in? Did they suddenly forget about the last 8 years? Democrats are like an alcoholic's wife...they are enablers. Rather than fighting the republican rule they help make it easier for them. John Edwards was the only democratic candidate who could've appealed to red state voters. Obviously democrats haven't been to red states lately. NASCAR dads and value voters haven't suddenly turned into progressive minded, cheese eating, wine drinking, beatniks. They are the same people that they always were and will not change. They vote for candidates who look, act, talk and think like they do. The democrats have seriously overplayed their hand. They actually had a chance to win this election but would rather protest it instead. I thought democrats would be smarter than this and see thru the media hype just like they did last time around when the media overhyped Howard Dean. At this point it doesn't matter which non-viable candidate the democrats nominate, they will get Mondaled in a national election. The best the dems can hope for now is that Huckabee doesn't win the rep nomination because whoever comes out the republican convention will be the next president, thanks to idealistic liberals with their heads in the sand. Hopefully democrats won't be so foolish in 2012. Thanks to people like Oprah and Ted Kennedy the country will have to suffer thru yet another 4 years of right wing republican rule.
Michael at 2:05PM on Feb 2nd 2008
11. Hillary or Obama will make mince meet out of McAain.
He is not a bright person. He is so fixed in what he believes and he truly is not knowledgable in many areas. He also is not a nice person. We respect him for his service and all that he has been through but that does warrant his being nominated. Actually, he would not have won Florida if Charlie Crist did not endorse him. Crist is a tremendous disapointment to the conservatives and it may come back to bite him. McCain will never become President. His nomination insures that the Supreme Court will suffer for years to come. Thanks to all of his political cronies and wanta be's
alfred bell at 2:33PM on Feb 2nd 2008
12. COME ON PEOPLE HILLARY IS THE ONLY ONE RUNNING WHO HAS BRAINS AND CLASS. OBAMA IS TOO YOUNG AND INEXPERIENCED BUT EVEN IF HE WEREN'T I WOULD NEVER VOTE FOR HIM. I JUST DON'T LIKE HIS ATTITUDE. IF HE WINS THE DEMO PARTY AS RUNNER I WILL VOTE REPUBLICAN,
VIV at 2:34PM on Feb 2nd 2008
13. Obama MUST CLARIFy his position in conjunction with his so-called Christian church who honors Farakkhan in their web site:
http://www.tucc.org/about.htm (See Trumpet Magazine article within the church's web site)
Farakkhan is the leader of the US Muslims and for this so-called Christian church to espouse their position for a "non-negotiable commitment for Africa" just does not JIVE with someone who wants to be President of this country. It is a black agenda and Obama is the one who truly is RACIST!!!
Nancy at 2:44PM on Feb 2nd 2008
14. ""CLINTON SLEEZE FATIGUE WILL INVIGORATE GOP, DISPIRIT DEMOCRATS AND SINK DEMOCRATIC TICKET""
""OBAMA/EDWARDS TO WIN""
It is possible that Senator Clinton is the best candidate. However, even though many may like the policies that Senator Clinton proposes, they should also consider her record, just as Senator Clinton insists.
.
The last Clinton Administration, when faced with the fact that protection rackets where assaulting, torturing and murdering people with poison and radiation, chose to avoid its responsibilities to incarcerate the criminals and to protect the citizenry.
.
Instead, they made a deal with the criminal gang stalker protection rackets to leave them alone and to consequently abandon the citizenry.
.
Do we want a President who sells out the citizenry for votes?
.
Do we want a President who sends a "crime does pay" message to society?
.
Would you vote for a President who signed nonaggression deals with the KKKlan or the Nazi party? Gangs that torture with poison and radiation are much like the KKKlan and Nazi Party.
.
We do not need a sellout President. We need a principled leader President.
.
If you are one of the few who do not know what the above refers to, do a web search for "gang stalking" to see the tip of the dirtberg. Please do it before you decide to reply to my post. Here let me make it easy for you :
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22gang+stalking%22
avraam jack at 2:50PM on Feb 2nd 2008
15. Not one candidate demo or Republican is going to be able to "get" us out of Iraq so "get" that out of your heads right now. The issue here is who will raise taxes, spending, and keeping illegals here. We all know the candidates that will do this.
jlep56 at 3:26PM on Feb 2nd 2008