<p>I have been wondering why I am attracted to Obama and McCain but not to Hillary. I think the following analogy helps me understand my own preferences a bit better. Does it make sense for anyone else?</p>
<p>I feel like if these are a bunch of applicants, then McCain and Obama are both appealing because their respective passions are evident. Their passions are totally different, but they really do stand out among their peers. </p>
<p>Hillary looks like the student who made sure to take all the right AP classes and got the good grades and test scores and took part in all the right extracurriculars- but failed to provide evidence of strong passions. No harm in granting her admission but she doesn’t make me as enthusiastic as the other two.</p>
<p>She strikes me as going further than that. She took a class and then dropped it if she wasn’t going to get an A. She volunteered at a shelter to earn community service hours, but fudged the number of hours on the application. She wrote that she was President of a new club at school but failed to mention that she was the only member. </p>
<p>On the surface, she looks like a great applicant until you get to know her better.</p>
<p>Wait a minute… I think she looks like the over qualified applicant for MIT or CalTech about 10 yrs ago, but doesn’t get in because she is a female… today, she would have a better chance at MIT than she will at the Oval Office…because the big boys are still running the joint. </p>
<p>I wish there was a way for Hillary and Obama to gain agreement on a joint ticket because together is where their strength is…one can handle process and one can handle inspiration. What good is all his inspiration if he is stonewalled? Hillary has had success in the Senate…and she is persistent. I do like Obama’s vantage point…I just don’t want Hillary left behind because I think her global perspective is better than any of the others. I do not think it is time for McCain…I think his time has passed…and I am thrilled that Romney is done because he sounded like a fringe nut/person in his speech where he suspended his campaign. </p>
<p>What makes you think Obama would be stone-walled? He seems to have run an excellent campaign. His organizational skills, planning and fund raising abilities seem top notch. He must know how to hire excellent staff as well. He isn’t just about his speeches although they are inspirational!</p>
<p>In the real world, Hillary would get in, and not obama. Passion can only take you so far if you dont have the extracurriculars, gpa, etc. Plus, who are you to say hillary possesses no passion?</p>
<p>If Hillary did not care about the people, then she wouldnt have even tried to get universal health care behind closed doors. You dont have to show off like obama about how much he supposedly cares; actions speak louder than words.</p>
<p>The loyalty and strength of her personal friendships says it all to me…she is a good human being doing the best she can the way she believes it should be done. None of us have a perfect spouse, but the bonds are what they are, and we maintain our families. </p>
<p>We hear reports that the Obama rallies are inspirational, and it is super that so many folks are interested and inspired. There is no question that he is a talented public figure, and all indications are he is an honorable man. </p>
<p>I just hope that votes are cast with the mind and not just the crowd enriched enthusiasm. And mostly I hope that policies can be decided morally and ethically and not dictated by party politics and planks.</p>
<p>I have heard both Hillary and Obama-Obama is brilliant and thoughtful. I am an Ivy-educated older woman, my husband is a Ph.D. scientist-please do not think
we do not weigh substance over gloss-and we still are excited about Obama. People who say he is just rhetoric are just falling for his opponent’s lines about him. Study up and you will see that he has much substance and real experience behind him. I have spent the last 8 years “tuning out” George Bush-I look forward to listening to a president that I can admire! -and rhetoric is very important.</p>
<p>“If Hillary did not care about the people, then she wouldn’t have even tried to get universal health care behind closed doors”</p>
<p>Thanks for reminding everyone. With all due respect, you’re doing more damage to Hillary than good.</p>
<p>We have a democracy, DJ, not a dictatorship. In a democracy the populace is entitled an open discussion of regulations or laws that will have an effect on their future or well being. Hillary was attempting to circumvent accountability.</p>
<p>b’smom,
I totally agree that rhetoric is important…Reagan proved its value, yes? I minored in speech in college…we studied some political speeches from the turn of the century…and others… and I do think Obama has something to offer…I think he has a level of integrity and interest in the greater good that definitely appeals to me… I just think he should spend a term as VP and learn even more before he becomes president… my gut is thinking this is Hillary’s time in the Oval Office…with Obama her VP… </p>
<p>The work that was done on health care during Bill’s tenure was mostly closed doors because corporate america was trying to take it down before it had any legs at all…that is my view on it… funny, I would welcome a discussion about democracy Erewhon about our current VP… he has done everything he can to stop an open discussion of regulations or laws… and that is why we need to change the party in the White House… cause they are reading this as we type…ha ha…</p>
<p>Maineparent, i feel the same way. Hillary for pres, obama vp.</p>
<p>And i also agree with maine parent on the closed door thing. It was a time when republicans wanted to tear her apart because universal health care was unacceptable to republicans and insurance companies. Now, everyone wants it. Hillary had the right vision at the time. This is why she keeps stressing she is the candidate of universal health care. She is the only one offering it and this is what NEEDS to happen.</p>
<p>MP,
How did we go from Hillary’s healthcare to Cheney?
Where did I ever indicate I was enthralled with the current administration?
Nothing could be further from the truth.</p>
<p>A TV show works based on concept, plots, casting, and writing. It is a production, and all the components are important. A fine cast cannot overcome a weak plot, a silly concept, and bad writing. As the shows age out, often as not, the writing gets weaker, or it seems to…at least it wears thin as we get to know the characters. </p>
<p>So how much of the perception this election cycle is the concept (they are not that far apart), the plot (externals are driving much of the drama), the casting (race and gender will affect this to some extent), and the very adept speech writers? </p>
<p>How will these “characters” survive, cope, thrive in this very public arena? Will the script writers keep the plots and characters fresh? What is the reality?</p>
<p>This isn’t a scripted show. To me, this seems more like America’s next top model. Its really who has done the best overall; although sometimes, the best doesnt always win, even though the best should!</p>
<p>Um, to be honest, i thought he was all rhetoric before hearing everyone else say it. He is always talking about unity, but unity will NEVER happen. Has there ever been a society that was unified? Doubtful. What he is trying to illustrate is utopia. As long as money, religion, etc still exist in society, we will never be “unified.”</p>
<p>Lastly, his stance on the war wasnt even official. He wasnt even in the senate to vote against iraq. He is all talk, no action.</p>
<p>P.S. dont even get me started on his “100 present” votes!</p>
<p>donjuan78: sorry to see that you are so cynical. we have had cynical people in control of the country for decades and look what we have got. You seem to think we can never unify the country or change things for the better. But to that I say:</p>
<p>“Yes we can”.</p>
<p>Actually, in some ways the correct answer is “Yes, we already have”. People even on this message board of diverse ideologies have expressed their enthusiasm for Obama’s message. </p>
<p>On the Republican side McCain was the best applicant: </p>
<p>He had a great college essay (can’t top the torture/POW story).
He demonstrated good strong passions (he acts like an Eagle scout).
His poor grade in AP macroeconomics can be overlooked.</p>
<p>Huckabee is quickly sent a rejection for his “D” grades in history and biology (evolution) and because he flunked AP US govt and politics (by suggesting the consitution be more biblical).</p>
<p>Romney bombed the interview by smirking too much.</p>
<p>Giuliani had great grades in freshman and sophomore years but his later grades started dropping and his counselor (right-wing ideologue) recommendations were terrible.</p>