Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Comments

  1. His speech was killer. And I don’t really like him.

    <

    p>Second best speech was Edwards. Clinton sort of… just spoke.

    <

    p>Obama’s speech really was great.

    • I can’t stand Obama, but there was a clear contrast between him and the other two in terms of quality and excitement in his speech.  That oration should be played into the ground across the country by the Obama campaign.  Mind you, he doesn’t mention just how he’s going to do all this, but that won’t stop people voting for him.

  2. .. in the rhetoric of Deval Patrick’s campaign as to there effect on inspiring the electorate. The reality is Deval hasn’t exactly moved the entrenched MA Demos on Beacon Hill with it so the Obama express has an eerie deja-vu quality to it that leaves me feeling a bit skeptical of what change he can really effect.

  3. had the same come-to-meeting effect…soaring rhetoric…great crowd pleaser…caveat: turning well-delivered rhetoric into action turns out to be a far more difficult thing to do…and requires in-depth knowledge of the subject matter and the process…which is hard to come by in under two years in the US Senate.

    <

    p>I fear the results may be the same as here in Massachusetts.  

    <

    p>That Joe Biden and Chris Dodd are out of the race is a cryin’ shame considering the state of the world we are living in and their in-depth understanding of it.

    <

    p>A few football stadiums worth of Iowans have winnowed the field for the rest of us. The bartering and dealing on “second choice” votes inflated both Obama and Edwards final totals.

    <

    p>Dodd and Kucinich supporters were instructed to go with Obama if they could not reach viability. Richardson folks in caucuses where he failed viability as it turns out were asked to go Obama, but split between Obama and Edwards.  

    <

    p>CNN did an interesting comparison between their Entrance Polling and the final results. Going into the caucus sites Clinton and Obama were about even with Edwards third.
    Wolf Blitzer also noted that the actual registered Democrats caucusing (as opposed to the Independents and Republicans who were also allowed to participate), the Democratic participants favored Clinton, Obama and Edwards in that order.

    <

    p>With NH just days away, Obama will surely “soar” into NH and get a bump from the media frenzy in Iowa.

    <

    p>All I can say is, be careful what you wish for…soaring on rhetoric can have disappointing consequences.

    <

    p>

    • Dodd and Kucinich supporters were instructed to go with Obama if they could not reach viability.

      That’s only half true.  Kucinich asked his supporters to go to Obama, but Dodd (correctly, I think) took umbrage at the notion that it was up to him to “auction off” (his words) the people who’d supported him up ’til now to a different candidate.

    • Have disappointing consequences, that is.

      <

      p>Comparing Barack and Deval is understandable: there are a lot of similarities. But there are a lot of differences too.

      <

      p>Most importantly, Deval had no electoral experience prior to his win. Barack has been a politician for 11 years. And while only three of them have been spent in Washington (note: the number is three, not “under two”), surely the Illinois Senate is a serious enough body of legislators that at least some of that experience should count for something.

      <

      p>Besides, I’m not ready to write off Deval just yet. Let’s all remember that Bill Clinton wasn’t all that effective his first year or two in office; yet, IMHO, he turned out to be a pretty damned good executive. Perhaps Deval deserves a bit more rope to work with. He might just turn out to be the same.

      <

      p>And while we’re trying to give Deval the benefit of the doubt, let’s not tar Barack with the brush of Deval’s early failures. It’s kind of cynical.

  4. is that Obama’s “hope” doesn’t hold a candle to Deval Patrick’s oratory skills in delivering it.

    <

    p>And I couldn’t be more disappointed in Governor Patrick in office so far. I’m agreeing with the comment before; deja-vu… but with a candidate who’s not even as good as Patrick was.

    <

    p>Obama’s speech isn’t bad, but I’ve yet to be impressed.

  5. The first thing that struck me in watching Obama was that he was not talking about himself.  He was talking about the United States of America.  And the audience. in sharp contrast to the other candidates’, was not chanting, “Obama, Obama” most of the time.  Instead, they were chanting, “USA, USA.”  Obama gives us hope that we can feel proud of our country again and feel proud to be Americans.  I think we all want that desperately.

    <

    p>Second, rather then tell us what he is going to do (read his policy proposals and look at his legislative style and accomplishments in Illinois and in the Senate), he asks us to stand up and join him. It is very reminiscent of the John Kennedy, Ask what you can do for your country, not what your country can do for you.”  I think Americans want to help solve our nations problems and dig ourselves out of the crater Bush has put us in.

    <

    p>The only other thing I want to say is that I have been in Asia for the last week and have been talking with people from all over the world.  People were very surprised that Obama beat Clinton in Iowa, but they also seemed very pleased and encouraged, that American might indeed turn the page and once again become a beacon of hope for the whole world.

Archives