With proud purple fingers raised
All reports coming out of New Hamshire say that voter turnout is huge. In all likelihood it is Democratic turnout that is higher. Especially for Barack Obama. Or more accurately, against Hillary.
We’ve seen this kind of thing before: on purple-stained Iraqi fingers. When a people are freed from the oppressive grip of a tyrannical regime and finally allowed to select their own leadership, they come out in hordes. Iowans freed Democrats across the nation from the shackles of nearly twenty years of Clintonian dictatorship over their party. Now that the established hierarchy has been overthrown, Granite Staters are lining up around the block to choose a new order. They are excited. And with good reason. It’s exciting to oust the old and be on the cusp of something new.
It is almost an accident that they got here at all. Rush Limbaugh, of all people, set the ball in motion when he prodded reporters to ask Hillary what she thought of her Governor’s plan to issue drivers licenses to illegal aliens. Tim Russert asked the question that night, and then hounded her when she waffled. Barack Obama jumped at the opening and said that it raised the issue of Hillary’s electability, and then all hell broke loose as he was pilloried by his own party for “echoing a Republican talking point”.
Today’s turnout is evidence that the talking point was right and Obama was right to raise it. Hillary is unelectable. Democrats knew that all along but were afraid to ever say so out loud. Tonight, after Hillary loses New Hampshire by a margin larger than anyone thought possible, newly-freed Democrats across the land can proudly raise their purple fingers high into the air.
UPDATE:
Dan Balz calls it a “Tipping Point”. I think he’s right. The magnitude of change at a tipping point usually stuns, but in retrospect, seems obvious.
Bill isn’t taking it well. Nor should he. This is all about him.
MORE:
I’m going to go out on a limb and predict that Obama beats Hillary by more than 20 points and approaches 50% of the Democratic vote. Even worse than getting calls for her to drop out of the race, after this thumping won’t get calls at all because everyone, EVERYONE, will know that it doesn’t matter if she stays in the race or not. Tomorrow she is irrelevant.
UPDATE:
Wow! Color me surprised. It’s early, but so far Clinton is beating Obama 40 to 36. I am astounded. But my better half predicted it. Before any of the returns came in she said that she was going to win becaus all of the calls went out from all of the Clinton people and they got everyone to the polls that they could.
She might be right.
January 8th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
I appreciate your thoughts, and somewhat agree. However, I don’t think this groundswell for Barack Obama was necessarily an “anti-Clinton” movement as it was a pro-Obama movement. In 2004, the support for Kerry was largely anti-Bush, and for Dean anti-War; but I’m just not convinced that the support for Obama was necessarily “anti” as it was “pro”.
January 8th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
Sean,
There are degrees of “anti”. There was a lot of anti-Bush and anti-war in 2004, but not enough to win.
This time there is a LOT of anti-Hillary. There’s probably also a good deal of pro-Obama, but I honestly don’t think that people are as in favor of Obama (as opposed to be pro-new or pro-change, which is different than being pro-him) as it they are against Clinton. Democrats have long wanted to vote against her. They just first needed to finally be given permission that it was okay. Iowa gave New Hampshire permission.
Had Hillary won the nomination, Republicans would probably win on the strength of anti-Hillary. Obama is winning big with that strength combined with anti-Bush.
January 8th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
I’m just happy it’s Obama and not Edwards who is reaping the rewards of the candy (finally) cascading out the Clinton pinata. I genuinely like the guy. Doubt I would vote for him (though it’s not impossible), but he seems about as genuine as a legitimate presidential candidate can be.
By the way, Sean, on another topic, you know it’s pointless to defend me against the barbs of Glen Dean, right? Not because you don’t have the chops (you do), but because I just can’t be trusted.
January 8th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Bob,
Well, you know, I can’t speak for average voters…but from the Obama events I’ve been to, and the people who quit lucrative jobs to volunteer free for Obama, I just don’t see anything but a genuine love of the candidate, irrespective of who he is running against. I’m sure some of the people voting for Obama are doing so to stop Hillary, mostly the older folks, but for the younger ones like myself, it is different.
Roger,
Yeah, I know, I just thought I’d point out that you like Fred Thompson…why is that again?
January 8th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Sean –
Lots of reasons, really, not the least of which being the fact that he is the most genuinely thoughtful and intelligent conservative in the race, and I’m naturally drawn to that. But there are others.
I think if you were to look at his overall record, you’ll recognize that he’s not quite the “hack” some folks think he is.
January 8th, 2008 at 8:53 pm
[…] thought she was crazy, but Cookie was […]