Palin and the Prophecy of the Pig

The incoming US President, faced with very serious problems on the national and international levels - including a possible collapse of the country's banking system by the first week of November- remains a toss-up between two candidates undergoing a rigorous election campaign, debating the critical issue of lipstick on a pig. Barack Obama's quote of this old adage has been connected by the John McCain camp as a slur on Sarah Palin, and the Republicans have prophesied this incident to be the cause of the GOP victory and the demise of the Democrat's candidacy. The prophecy may be fulfilled when pigs fly.

John McCain has been enjoying an enormous piggy back ride on the popularity of Sarah Palin, whose own stretching of the truth about her refusal to accept congressional earmarked funds; the "Bridge to nowhere" story; and the pipeline for natural gas; are subtle fairy tales meant for a wolf to lure the 3 little pigs. Truth is, she accepted $27 million in congressional funds while mayor of Wasilla; the natural gas pipeline was just signed two weeks ago which is viewed as unfeasible and will cost $40 billion, not $27 billion; and the infamous bridge she fully supported, then opposed when the earmarked funds were already removed . But the funds were given to Alaska which they used for other projects. To date, she has requested $167 million in earmarked funds from Congress.

The elasticity of the truth seems to be limitless as far as these politicians are concerned. Like the Obama campaign's statement that a technologically challenged President is not suitable for the office - referring to McCain's inability to operate a computer or send e-mails, when he is obviously a disabled veteran. All innuendoes, half truths, and stretches must be categorized for what these are: LIES! But the swine herd mentality of the campaign continues to pursue the heaping of mud on one another, thereby muddling the issues that matter most in the lives of the people. It's as plain as a pig on a sofa, the campaign by both parties is shallow and senseless, supported by sound bytes that` are in a pig's eye.

Both candidates are sweating like pigs trying to outdo one another, and are conducting their campaigns as clumsily as hogs on ice. They both seem to be packaging themselves with heavily over extended storylines to create a persona with the oratorical and inspirational skills of Kennedy or Reagan, a protector from America's enemies like Eisenhower and Roosevelt, a geo-political master like Nixon, a tough go-getter who can manuever Congress to pass important legislation like Johnson, the star quality of a decent man like Carter, and the economic savvy of a Clinton. These elements are being lumped in a single package - to attract the voters - minus these men's achilles heels of course. But this packaging is slicker than a greased pig, because such a person with all these qualities does not exist.

America is $9.3 trillion in debt, it is involved in wars on practically 3 fronts, it's banks are teetering from the mortgage crisis, its obligations in health and social security amounting to trillions of dollars more are forthcoming, and its economy is staring at a recession so deep it will give the incoming President a nightmare worse than working knee deep in mud, inside a sealed pig sty. And the campaigns by both parties choose to make a pig's ear of the debating process. Voters should heed the biblical proverb "Do not cast your pearls before swine" before deciding to vote. This election and its ghastly conduct may leave them squealing like a stuck pig after.

American voters must be perceived as ignorant by the candidates should this trend continue. Voters must refuse to be a party to this charade of silly attacks and demand a focus on issues that affect their future as a people and as a nation. It was Churchill who said " Dogs look up to man, cats look down on man, and pigs look at man in the eye and see an equal". If Americans allow themselves to be seen as simpletons, then they can expect their country to be mired worse than a pig pen - together with the hogs they elected into office. That is the only real prophecy that has any possibility of fulfillment in this election.

Haaaarrrrwwwwwk...Twoooooooph...Ting!

Pig Image with lipstick from Mick Coulas

Clinton's Curtain Call

After 17 months on the campaign trail, Hillary Clinton acknowledged the curtain call from thousands of supporters, and delivered a powerful speech that extolled the accomplishments and significance of her efforts for all the women of America. It was a genuine, original, and touching expression of herself as a pioneering woman in America trailblazing for the future generations, and going where no other woman has come close to achieving. She achieved a milestone in the fact that a woman can win presidential primaries and come close to a major party nomination for president. Her efforts have opened the floodgates for the strong likelihood of a woman becoming President of the United States.

Hillary has always projected a fighting and competitive nature, and she made her exit from the primaries with a bang. In her moment of taking a final bow to the unrelenting cheers of her supporters, she finally peeled off the armor that was installed by her advisers, which gave her a toughness they believed was necessary to convince voters she had the mettle to run the country. It was a mantle that removed much of her warmth and humanity. And yet, without the armor, a better Hillary was exposed which was not familiar to most of the party's voters. Her campaign projected an image of one who had the experience of battle, and the endurance for stress as good as any man, who just happens to be a woman; rather than a woman who had all the capabilities needed for the highest office, plus the empathy, tenderness and affection of a woman.


It would have been different if at the outset she communicated her unifying feminine factor to guide and nurture the country to its rightful place, as a strong and stable mother would when the family or the household needs to come to terms when crisis strikes. As a woman, she could disagree without raising ire, communicate compassion and empathy with or without tears, and she could delve into her inner self and visualize where she would take the country and what it can overcome and become. And she would have found the voice, manner and disposition that all women and mothers have, and express it as deeply and sincerely as only a woman could, repeatedly, to get her message across. But all these were removed by her advisers who thought that being a woman was a weakness, not a distinct and differential advantage. Her skeptics painted her as a Clinton, a clone of the original, when she could have been branded as not just a fusion of the better elements of her competitors nor a better version of Bill, but a better and more prepared original. Sadly, this was abandoned for a safer packaging.

As a gesture of party unity, she endorsed Barack Obama wholeheartedly and rallied her supporters to the Democratic cause. She acknowledged the fact that Obama is also one of the milestones that the party had achieved, being the first African American candidate for President of a major political party. But her message was clearly for women and the barriers she overcame on their behalf.

Obama still has considerable work to do in unifying the party's base of supporters. Hillary's gesture will help in easing some of the difficulties, but Obama must acknowledge and understand the importance of the mission that Hillary's campaign had evolved into, and would do well to address these firmly during the Presidential campaign. The gender cause has been released at the close of Hillary's campaign, and it will need to be given serious consideration and well thought out programs to keep her supporters behind the Democrats. Within the Party, this cause has ceased to be a battlefront and will now become a negotiated settlement. The next battle will be a thorny, tempestuous, debasing and ignoble one, which threatens to raise the demons of the past and the sorrow and suffering of its existence.......racism.

Haarrrrwwwwk...Twooooooph...Ting!

Photos Courtesy of Getty Images and AFP

The Democrats' Diminishing Dominion

Stalwarts of the Democratic party whose influence once resonated throughout America are being sidelined, either by their own undoing, or by the natural process of elimination brought on by illness and physical wear and tear. These are the pillars that the party could lean on to boost its chances in the presidential elections in November, and whose achievements could stand as its foundation for a better America. But they are slowly being taken out of the equation, and this absence may weaken the Democratic party's quest to wrest the White House from the Republicans.

Former President Jimmy Carter, considered one of the most successful ex-presidents for his many peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts, has recently been widely criticized for his reported plan to meet with Hamas; considered a terrorist organization. His office neither confirmed nor denied the meeting but had said that no one in the State Department, including Secretary Condoleezza Rice had warned him against doing so, a tacit admission of the plan. The bad publicity created by the planned meeting with the enemy was viewed as treachery by some sectors in the US, and is being used as ammunition against the Democratic party.

Former President Bill Clinton and his actuations in the course of the Democratic primaries, had diminished his stature as a former Head of State and statesman who should be above the fray in the party's political infighting. The memory of his substantial contribution to America as President together with the 8 years of prosperity that he generated is eroding. In the minds of the electorate, what looms as a possibility is a desire to seek a third term and the return of the manipulative ways of Washington. Or, that he and his wife will say or do anything to get the nomination.

The most telling blow for the Democrats is the illness of Senator Edward Kennedy whose cancerous brain tumor will greatly reduce his participation in the general election. Kennedy is a skilled and highly respected politician, whose power and influence in Congress allows him to successfully push sponsored Bills even in a Republican controlled Senate. He is also a tireless campaigner and a formidable fund raiser whose capacity to generate financial support for the party's candidates will be sorely missed. The current divisions in the party resulting from the bitter primary contests requires a huge effort of unification and consolidation that perhaps only Kennedy can mend. But his expected absence may not make this possible.

It is difficult to conceive of a Democratic campaign without the constant presence of Senator Kennedy. He is a crucial element and an irreplaceable keystone of the party's platform and program of governance. In his closing statement during the Democratic National Convention in 1980, considered one of the most stirring and eloquent speeches he has ever made, he said: "For me, a few hours ago, this campaign came to an end. For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die".

Senator Kennedy's words spoke of his vision of America, one that offered hope and its unsurpassed potential to reclaim its rightful place of dignity in the international community. These are the same ideals being echoed by Barack Obama, stated in the same inspiring vein. The difference is, Kennedy ended his campaign with it, Obama cannot put an end to his. The painful path that the current democratic primaries are going through is heading towards harmful consequences that could be irreconcilable come November. And, without the strong influence of a masterful party pillar who belongs to America's "Royal Family", danger could lead to disaster.

Senator Kennedy's dream and the Democratic party's visions may never die, but it may also fail to find fulfillment.

Harrrwwwwwk...Twoooooph...Ting!

Clinton's Crumbling Candidacy

The would be Clinton dynasty is checkmated. Its formidable foundation at the beginning of the primaries has been penetrated and weakened, and its pillars crumbling and shaky. Some of its staunch supporters have begun switching over to the Barack Obama camp, and the likelihood of others following that lead is imminent. The Clinton camp is engaged in damage control, while the Obama camp is propelled by renewed momentum. Clinton's defensive positioning and its bold announcement of continuing the campaign is an aggressive method of securing a favorable Terms of Surrender. And surrender is inevitable.

Operation October Surprise, pertains to damaging information about Barack Obama which the Clinton camp would use to win over the super delegates in November, is not yet operational. No such information has been unearthed. If it exists and they can harness its potential, the party itself will be demolished for her personal ambition. It will cost her the general election and ruin whatever positive legacy Bill Clinton's presidency may have gained. The party will not allow this to happen, and Hillary may opt to use it only to gain a package that would guarantee her a position of influence within the party, or within a victorious (if ever) Democrat controlled Presidency.

Hillary's best deal would be the Vice Presidential nomination, but Obama may not find this comfortable. The bitter exchanges during the primaries would make their chemistry suspect, if not explosive, in a general election. Further, a Hillary Clinton as Vice-President with Bill a former President lurking in the background may undermine his decisions and influence. A cabinet position for Hillary may be the best that Obama can offer, but may not be attractive enough for Hillary because it's not as powerful nor as prestigious as an elective position. It could be better for Obama if Hillary rejects his offer, since this will unload him of the burden that the Hillary baggage brings. But it may cost him the support of Hillary's base voters of white, women, elderly, blue collar and Latino/Hispanic blocs if she doesn't get what she wants. It will be tougher for Obama facing John McCain with these concerns, in addition to the acceptance of his character, skills and message by an American electorate who are influenced by these factors, as much as perhaps the color of his skin.

The most meaningful purpose of the Clinton camp's intent to pursue the campaign is to obtain a graceful and dignified exit. Any purpose other than this is desperation that would only result in eternal damnation.

Haarrrrwwwwk...Twoooooph...Ting!

Recession Rocks the Republicans

The pained expression on the face of Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke when he addressed a Congressional Committee last week spoke volumes about the state of the US economy. The hopeful but cautious forecasts that marked his previous announcements since the collapse of the mortgage markets could no longer be viable as possibly true. When he said that "A recession is possible in the first half of 2008", it was the best phrase he could muster on the subject. He knew, America is already in it.

Lay-offs, the final factor of a deep recession was not on the radar screen of economic statistics since it is normally a lagging indicator; and as long as there are no reports of jobs being slashed, there was hope for a measure of growth. But the Labor Department's release last Friday of 3 consecutive months of job layoffs since January doused all hopes. A total of 232,000 jobs were shed in the first quarter (March - 80,000; February - 76,000; January - 76,000) across several sectors. The unemployment rate, covered by a separate household survey rose to 5.1%, with 434,000 Americans reporting that they were unemployed.

America's longest war (Vietnam) and costliest war (WW II) have been exceeded by the War on Terror. Iraq and Afghanistan has cost the US half a trillion dollars of borrowed money, when 2001 estimates were only at $50 billion. The budget deficit could run up to $350 billion this year including the stimulus package of $160 billion of which only 20% will return to the government by way of taxes. Yet this return will still not pay for the borrowed amount plus interest of the savings lent by other nations. America will have to create more wealth to pay for the war, the deficits, and the stimulus package; but with jobs being slashed and the non-reversal of big business strategy of outsourcing jobs abroad for higher profits - there is little it can do to increase GDP from its present 18%. It may even shrink further. Eighty two percent of what America consumes is imported.

Cuts in interest rates by the Federal Reserve spur the economy, but it is a contributing factor to a weak dollar. Sustaining the wars will drain resources and increase borrowings, further weakening the dollar. Collapse of the mortgage markets have generated losses to financial institutions whose default or deferment of loan payments to foreign banks add to the weakening of the dollar. Unemployment and job loss will generate delinquencies in payments for credit cards, auto loans, educational loans, among others, which are securities held by banks that back up their portfolios. These will also weaken the dollar. A weak dollar will raise the prices of gas, oil, energy, commodities and the 82% of items that America imports. Should Asian and Middle Eastern countries opt to dump the dollar in exchange for the Euro, the American Economy may collapse.

The recent CBS News and New York Times survey point to an increasing disenchantment of Americans with the way the country is being run. The Republicans cannot escape accountability for this one. That Bill Clinton's term should have stopped Osama bin Laden from bringing in 9/11 is a childish argument. They had the means to stop it but they failed. They had the support after, to manage the assault, but they bungled it. They raised fears so that Americans would give up some of their civil liberties, which they abused. They lied about many aspects of the war from the most critical to the most trivial. Now, Americans may be stunned in disbelief, but hopefully not indecision.

If they had a fool for a President, they can at least prove to the world that American citizens are not insane. Unless of course they choose a leader who will pursue a crazy war.

Haaaarrrwwwwk...Twooooooph...Ting!

Harry Heads for Home

Prince Harry's tour of duty in Afghanistan came to an abrupt end after 10 weeks, because his deployment and presence in that country had been uncovered by the Drudge Report. This US based online website, famous for breaking the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky scandal, had published the story in its front page last Wednesday; beating all UK media outfits to a scoop about a Royal Family member's location and participation in the war.

Last Tuesday, the German newspaper Bild ran a diary story inquiring about Prince Harry, and speculated on rumors that he had gone to war. But the unsubstantiated rumor was not a cause for alarm until the Drudge Report blasted the cover in its website. The fact is, the British media had been met by the Chief of the General Staff, Sir Richard Dannatt, to make a case for a voluntary agreement. This was revealed by Jon Williams, BBC News editor.

Prince Harry wanted an army career and asked to be deployed to apply what he had been trained for, even for a day. The UK officials wanted a news blackout so as not to unnecessarily endanger the Prince and all those soldiers serving with him. It was made clear that any media member could leave the agreement anytime. In exchange, the media would be granted access to him before, during, and after his tour in Afghanistan; but no report of his deployment would be made until he comes home.

That the agreement lasted 10 weeks is an achievement in itself. Only the salivating, irresponsible, and malodorous vultures of the US media ended the blackout. This kind of journalism by a segment of the US media is typical of the papparazzi mentality, seeking only to profit at the expense of other peoples lives. It is a classic example of invoking the right to publish the truth guaranteed under the freedom of the press, in total disregard for the rights of others, even if lives are at stake. The lessons yet to be learned by a future leader, whose noble intentions at the risk of personal safety had been sacrificed by the selfish quest for vainglory, may never be realized.

While it may be argued that the war is unjust in the first place and the UK was merely protecting one of its ruling elite members; it grossly eliminates the very real possibility of having those other soldiers serving with the Prince, from being in greater harm in the already perilous situation with the Taleban.This fact had not at all registered in their collective conscience, if they still have one.

Haaaarrrrwwwk...Twoooooph...Ting!

Blacks Bolster Barack's Bid

Was Barack Obama's South Carolina primary victory conceded by the Clinton strategists? Did the Clinton camp see the futility of contesting this primary and opted to put up a token campaign instead? Was the high profile presence of former President Bill Clinton intended to draw attention to the issues raised against Obama and expose the Illinois Senator's weaknesses to the entire nation, not merely in South Carolina? Was the expected victory of Obama intended to consolidate Hillary's base of support in the 24 state primary the way she did in New Hampshire? Is this a Queen's gambit of sorts?

The Clinton perspective could have seen the situation this way: They have won New Hampshire and Nevada. The Super Tuesday primary was only 10 days from the South Carolina primary, where bigger states like New York, New Jersey and California had to be consolidated and won. South Carolina was predominantly black (almost 60% of voters) and polls showed an overwhelming support for Obama among blacks. The reasons for a Hillary loss here were in-place, and a loss would not diminish her momentum going into February 5th. All Hillary needed was to take second place to cast a respectable finish. Whether or not they expected it to be 2 to 1 is another story, but the polls had already indicated that margin more than a month ago.

The plan involved the following: Hillary campaigns in New Jersey, New York and California and leaves Bill Clinton and Chelsea to represent her during most of the campaign days. They decide to cut all costs to a minimum to the point of practically conducting the campaign by remote control. Only 5 people were working in the Clinton campaign office in Greenville since the fall, compared to Obama's 20. The campaign did away with phone and mail campaigns and removed practically any extensive expenditures 2 months before. In contrast, Obama's campaign had the most extensive field coverage ever witnessed by the state. Finally, Bill Clinton's task was to draw attention to himself and to the issues he raised against Obama, and away from Hillary.

South Carolina was a MUST win for Barack. He needed this win to set him back on track as a top contender after stunning back to back losses. And that's all this victory did, make him a contender, but at what cost? Eighty per cent of blacks (comprising 59% of voters) voted for him, he also took 25% of the white votes. He obtained 58% of the 18 to 64 year old voters and only 22% of the women votes. In the predominantly white (78%) Greenville County, he garnered only 22%. Among women voters and those aged 65 and over, Clinton got 44% and 40% respectively. The results show Barack's weak areas among women voters, white and elderly voters; which could give him a huge problem come Super Tuesday.

Interestingly, 47% of voters made their choices more than a month ago, another 32% said they decided within the month, while 10% of those polled said they decided 3 days prior to the voting itself.

If the Clinton strategy indeed was to concede South Carolina, was it a wise one? It was. Barack was visibly rattled and irked during his stump and was very defensive during the debates. He was unable to defend himself against attacks on his health care plan; and his counter attack versus Hillary about Wal-Mart, was quashed by her statement against Barack defending a "slumlord" in Illinois. The week before the primary saw one of the most bitter attacks, accusations, and distortions from both camps. Hillary and Bill are adept at this game, and Obama was lured into it. Bill Clinton evaded making the campaign a gender versus race issue and expressed elation at the Party's progress in its choice of a Woman and an African American, as living up to the ideals of Martin Luther King; but that seems to be his real intention. With the blacks coming all out for Obama, the Clinton camp is anticipating a consolidation of Hillary's base of supporters where Obama's base are fewer in number, and where the delegate harvest is greater. Remember, Bill Clinton is a shrewd tactician and a street smart politician.

The New York Times has endorsed Hillary, while Caroline Kennedy has endorsed Barack. Will one be greater than the other? Perhaps. Will it make a difference? Not much. Barack Obama's victory statement that the campaign "is about the past versus the future" is appropriate. He should put South Carolina behind him and focus on the future, 10 days to be exact, where from the perspective of race and gender that had been exhaustively covered in South Carolina, real numbers are stacked against him. And it looks very formidable indeed!

Haaarrrrwwwwk...Twoooooph...Ting!

Hispanics Hoist Hillary

The Democratic Party's Nevada primary was marred by accusations of dirty politics hurled by both the Clinton and Obama camps against each other. The bitter exchanges involved race issues that threatened to split the party's ranks rather than strengthen its unity. A struggle over the Culinary Workers Union had split the group with the officers endorsing Obama, while many of the rank and file opted for Hillary. Hillary Clinton won the primary with 51% of the popular votes, garnering 12 delegates. Obama was 6% behind at second with 45 %, but netted 13 delegates because of the areas where he bested Clinton.

A case was filed by Clinton supporters against the setting up of voting booths in casinos, which was junked by the court. Union workers went against the endorsement by their officers and openly campaigned for Hillary. Earlier, the two senators called a truce on the race issue and offered to run clean campaigns, but apparently, their field supporters were escalating the rift with efforts geared at disparaging the other camp's candidate.

Clinton won on the strength of white voters winning 52% over Obama's 34%. Women voters, comprising 59%, also went with Hillary at 51% versus 38% for Obama. The men votes were evenly split. Catholic voters (27%) chose Hillary too at 58%, while union members (30%) was evenly spread between the two candidates. What carried the day for Hillary was the Hispanic vote which gave her 66% to Obama's 33%, and they accounted for 52% of the voters. What is significant for Obama is the fact that the black voters, who made up 15%, gave an overwhelming 83% support for the Illinois Senator.

Former President Bill Clinton campaigned for his wife at the casinos, where his charisma and the economic gains contributed by his Presidency are well remembered by workers in the State. These visits aided the victory to some degree. The predominance of women is also a big factor for Hillary which is strikingly similar to the voter composition in New Hampshire.

The Democrat primary's next test will be in South Carolina where about one third of voters are black. If Barack Obama's momentum from black voters in Nevada (83%) are carried on in this State, this will pose a huge problem for Hillary. If John Edwards is able to capitalize on his popular support in South Carolina, where he won over John Kerry in 2004; Hillary may even wind up in third place again. Should Obama prevail on the strength of the black votes in South Carolina, the Democratic Party will be witnessing an alignment of forces with the Hispanics going for Clinton, while the blacks standing behind Obama. In delegate rich California, Hispanics make up 20% while blacks are at 6%. New Jersey's Hispanic and black electorate is also an area of interest to see if such a schism will take shape.

Hillary, despite winning two primaries, is credited with a total of only 36 delegates, while Obama has 38. A win in South Carolina is crucial for her since it will provide a strong impetus going into the February 5 primaries in 22 States. Obama too, needs to win in South Carolina to reset his stalled push and regain his footing after back to back losses. For Edwards, a win will give him enough reason to continue, a decisive loss will give him the exit.

The Democrat primaries are becoming more intense in an unpalatable sort of way. If this continues, it will be doubtful if they can win over the Republicans come November, as voters may tire of their bickering and begin to believe that neither of them is worth electing into office. Organization and diligence did it for Hillary in Nevada, a factor that failed for Obama. He seems more prepared for South Carolina. However, if either Hillary or Barack engage anew in politics of the underhanded kind, declaring a clean approach but allowing their supporters to use devious and deceitful tactics, these will work against their favor and the Party's as well. Today, the Democrats hold the higher moral ground over the Republicans. If their front runners continue using and throwing dirt, they will lose this privileged position in the minds of the electorate.

The Democrats should bear in mind the importance of party unity, and skepticism exists about the ability of Hillary and Barack to accomplish this. If they don't mend their ways, things could get really ugly for the Democrats, and the United States for that matter.

Haaaarrrwwwwk...Twwwooooph...Ting!

Hope for a Humanized Hillary

Political analysts and news organizations have hailed Hillary Clinton's victory in New Hampshire as an upset, referring to her as a second "Comeback Kid". While her triumph in New Hampshire is a testament to the survivability, mettle, and resilience of the Clintons, it is by no means an upset. What was upsetting to the political pundits, pollsters, and even bloggers was the fact that they were wrong in writing her off in the granite state, with predictions that a loss will doom her candidacy for good. There were others who saw a Barack Obama win (myself included), but have not prepared an obituary for the Clinton campaign as yet.

This is not to say that a Clinton victory is assured, because she came very close to being obliterated. Even top Clinton supporters were anticipating an Obama conquest and were considering a loss of below 5 percentage points a victory. Some were ready to find reasons to quit to join Barack Obama's camp. An Obama win would have catapulted him to become the undisputed front runner and seize a humongous momentum for the succeeding primaries. He fell short of expectations, but it was not an upset.

Hillary was a two-to-one front runner two months ago, tagged as the inevitable nominee with an aura of invincibility. Not anymore. She won by a slim margin of 3 percentage points which is not decisive. That is upsetting. Today, she is back as a contender and a front runner, but the race is wide open. Independent voters who comprised 43% of those polled opted for Obama (43%) versus Clinton (31%). The independents are crucial to a Democrat victory against Republicans in November, and this should not be overlooked. Hillary is weak in this segment. Among registered Democrats, Hillary, however, had the advantage at 45% to Obama's 34%.

Hillary's win came from the women votes (54% of voters), garnering 45% to Obama's 36%. Older voters outnumbered the younger ones, those above 40 (67%) voted heavily for Hillary, while Obama had a 2 to 1 lead over those under 30. The men votes were evenly distributed. Fifty percent of first time voters (1 in 5) supported Obama, 33% supported Hillary.

The knack for attracting independents, combined with the magnetism to expand the Democrat followers through first time voters and the younger set, remains the success area of Obama. The decline in the voting population is due largely to the skepticism of the youth towards the political process and politicians themselves. Obama's gift for electrifying this potentially huge segment plus the independents, will render him the most electable Democrat candidate in 2008. Its a given that registered Democrats will vote for the party's candidate, but the task of motivating them to come out and vote is better suited for Obama. What transpired in Hillary's victory at the granite state is a throng of registered women Democrats beyond 40 years of age. The independents, first timers, and 18-36 year old bracket voters went out to vote for Barack, not Hillary.

Barack Obama's message in Iowa " We are one people, one nation. Our time for change has come", is saying JFK's line (The torch is passed), but directed towards Obama's (Our time for change...) leadership of this generation. In New Hampshire he declared, "It's not just about what I'll do as President, it is also about what you...the people of America, can do to change it". This is a rewording of JFK's "Ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country" ending statement in his inaugural speech. The message was retouched but its impact remains potent, primarily because politicians have made a huge mess of things. If Bill Clinton was John Kennedy's heir in his vision of change, Bill's heir apparent in this continuing saga for the vision of a better America is Barack Obama, not Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Hillary's much talked about, (and much maligned) near breakdown helped in portraying a more human side to her erstwhile stone solid projection. Near catastrophic defeat humbled her. Her statement, "I listened to you and in the process I found my voice. I felt like we all spoke from our hearts and I'm so gratified you responded"; is an acknowledgment of her inadequacy at making a powerful connection. Certainly, her teams efforts at getting the women and youth voters helped, but this episode on TV may have been the defining moment for her campaign.

Hillary's problem is that she couldn't let go of her Iron Man persona, and their failure to connect stems from their insistence on a combative approach and fighting stance with steely personalities in a man's world. This is her most tragic error. By positioning herself as more man than woman, she is rejecting herself as a woman in particular, and rejecting all women in general. That she has to be more than a man to be President, in contrast to Michelle Obama's acceptance of being wife, mother and professional, is denying the very essence of what she is supposed to represent. Americans are tired of combat, political battles and wars. The veterans of Vietnam up to Iraq 1 and 2 still live and realize the futility of those battles, the senselessness of the mayhem, and the inevitable miseries that accompany such engagements. Obama's consensus approach is a change that is believable if only for its logic, even without the elegantly worded rhetoric.

Should this "defining moment" emerge as her epiphany in this campaign; begins to listen more and involve participation from voters; cultivate more of "us and we" statements rather than the alienating "I, and My" pronouncements; make permanent this adjusted tone in her approach by being more intimate, personal, and directed towards peoples needs; and seek the party's nomination not as an entitlement, but by humbly requesting for the party's blessings; she stands a good chance of remaining a very strong contender.

Barack Obama has a slight edge, but he will have to demonstrate his readiness with specifics. As for John Edwards, he would do America a lot of good and save a lot of money for his country too by quitting now. The game is over for him. After throwing even the kitchen sink in Iowa, I'd hate to see his underwear in Nevada or South Carolina too!

Haaarrrrwwwwk...Twoooooooph...Ting!

Barack's Blooming Bandwagon

Momentum is on Barack Obama's side in New Hampshire. What started about a month ago as a Hilliary Clinton two-to-one lead leveled at 33% each before the weekend. After the debates, Barack Obama surged to 39% versus Hillary's 29%. By Monday, Barack has increased his lead to 41%, with Hillary remaining pegged at 29%. It is safe to say that Barack Obama will take New Hampshire with plenty to spare as he did in Iowa. Hillary Clinton's campaign will be steamrolled by the Barack Bandwagon that looks fired up and unstoppable at this time.

Hoping to replicate Bill Clinton's 1992 resurgence from a poor initial showing, Hillary has acknowledged her team's inadequacy in reaching out to younger voters, and are taking efforts at correcting this. But with only four days between primaries, its doubtful if it can provide a push. Besides, the circumstances are totally different. Last December 45% believed Hillary was electable. Today, Obama beats her 42% to 31%. With deep roots, nationwide organization, and lots of money, the hoped for comeback is what the Clinton camp draws from. The challenge posed by Obama will test the mettle of Clinton's survivability. A decisive Obama victory on Tuesday will send the Clinton team in full retreat; which will reveal their ability, and perhaps endurance, to mount an effective counter attack.

Barack's success is in his seeming effortless ability to excite, inspire, and eventually mobilize the younger voters. His message of hope has been embraced by the youth who have grown tired of the cynical, skeptical, combative, partisan, politics of wheeling and dealing, characteristic of Washington methods for most of their lives. They especially adhere to the "respectful tone"of the approach, having lived through ugly campaigns; and are ennobled by the practice of "defying the conventional campaign" by attacking opponents swiftly and tellingly, sticking to a moral high ground instead; and by appealing to the broadest - rather than the narrowest - base of supporters.

Young people, in their 20's and below, come in droves to campaign for Obama. The energy and creative enthusiasm has produced a remarkable grassroots machinery based on first time caucus goers, about to vote 17 year-olds, use of their superior knowledge of the internet to reach other younger voters and issuing a novel "online tickets" for rallies, and other tactics that increased new voter turnout by about 80,000. This led to Barack's spurt in the youth votes, first timer votes, as well as the women votes since most of their contacts were females. The core of their strategy is not only to get the contact to vote, but to campaign and/or volunteer for the Obama Camp.

The only way Hillary could win in New Hampshire is to win the independent voters (40% of the caucus goers). While most independents say they would vote for the GOP rather than the Democrats, whoever changes their mind about this decision will get their vote. Obama's army of young warriors are hard at work on it. The odds favor Barack Obama even among independents.

At this stage, Hillary should start regrouping and not expect a victory in New Hampshire. At best she will be a far second. She should start work on supporters of John Edwards if there are any left, to narrow the gap in New Hampshire and hopefully lead in the next state. How she will mount a comeback after a second loss remains to be seen, but Barack Obama's digital machinery moves and grows in milliseconds; and his blooming support on the ground grows exponentially by the day.

As the images in Iowa clearly revealed, Obama's crowd oozed with energy and the fiery determination of an emerging wave of hope. In contrast, the Clinton crowd looked haggard, tired, worn out, and, at a loss for ideas. It reminded one of a home for the aged.

Haaarrrrwwwwk...Twoooooph...Ting!