first Democratic popular vote majority in 32 years
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/instapund…
the popular vote was 51.9% for Obama and 46.8% for McCain, making the Illinois senator the first Democrat to win a majority of the popular vote since 1976.
…just echoing something that I said a lot in 2000 and 2004 in response to the anti-Bush folks: Clinton did not win a majority of votes, either time.
Anyway, while I am in favor of the Electoral College (because the United States is not, or at least, should not be, a single State, but it is a union of individual states, each of which sends representatives to larger body (like the UN)), it is nice to put aside, at least for a few years, the fatuous debate over whether someone is “really” the president if they didn’t get the popular vote.
Also, if we’ve chosen cowardice (and will get socialism) let the sticky stain be on as many hands as possible.
This betrayal of freedom was a popular choice.
(Note that I could say the exact same thing even if McCain was president elect today).
November 5th, 2008 at 8:50 am
The richest irony of the 2012 campaign will come from media and left-wingers questioning whether Governor Bobby Jindal has sufficient age and experience to guide the nation through the tough times ahead.
November 5th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Democrats have won pluralities at times, though; when a viable third-party candidate enters the mix, that’s all you can really expect of ANY candidate. Even 5% skimmed off makes a majority impossible.
Nice semantic games, there.
November 5th, 2008 at 10:13 am
[quote comment="170678"]The richest irony of the 2012 campaign will come from media and left-wingers questioning whether Governor Bobby Jindal has sufficient age and experience to guide the nation through the tough times ahead.[/quote]
And they’ll be absolutely right to question it. And he’ll have to make his case to the American people, in his words and his actions during the campaign, to convince people that it’s not a problem.
It’s a valid concern. It’s always been a valid concern, and when we picked Obama in the primaries, it was still a bit of a shot in the dark. By now, though, we’ve clearly set people’s minds at ease on that issue, and others, and earned some confidence.
If Jindal is all that people hope he is, he should have no trouble doing the same. With any luck, 2012 will be an election on issues and convictions, and not on this ad hominem crap.
November 5th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
It was a joke PermaChris. By 2012 Jindal will have been a governor for five years, a longer time than Obama has been a senator as of this writing. Before that Jindal served in Congress, joining the House at the same time Obama joined the Senate.
Don’t be such a serious sam.
November 7th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
And remember, people complaining about Palin’s inexperience were engaged in doublethink given Obama’s inexperience.