Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Why I'm negative

gurufrisbee has observed that I've been negative about the Democratic Party lately. And, while I'm not down on the party, I'm certainly down on the standard-bearers and this primary process.

This election should be as near a "gimme" as have ever been in American history. President Bush has ruined everything he has touched. Iraq is a quagmire. The economy is tanking. Our standing in the world is abmismal. Al-Qaeda is far from defeated. Gas is $3.50 a gallon. The dollar is near all-time lows. Nothing that the Republicans have done under President Bush have worked out well.

The Republican brand should be in the tank.

Yet, according to recent polling McCain, Obama, Clinton in dead heat in election matchup

Instead of taking on the Republicans, Democrats have been raising shedloads of money to spend on taking each other down. Obama's negatives are up in the latest poll and Clinton still can't get above 50% in most polls.

While Democrats are hitting each other over and over, McCain is getting a free ride to shore up his support within the Republican Party and begin to cast himself as a moderate fence-builder who both understands Washington and can change it from the inside-out.

So HRC has spent plenty of time pushing Obama's pastor's crazy statements, no fire has been spent on McCain's own embrace of an equally crazy loon, John Hagee

Obama has been pushing for HRC to open up her tax returns, but hasn't even made the same request of McCain.

I used to think that Democrats were a shoe-in for the White House. Now, I'm less sure. We should have won in 1988, 2000 and 2004, but didn't. With our infighting and a history lesson, please excuse me for being a little negative.