Quote:
Originally Posted by DynamiteRave
I'm not saying anyone is more likely. (Even though I know you were addressing dmek). I feel like no matter who runs this country they have to be willing to reach across party lines from time to time to unite and be overall successful.
Although I don't agree with that 100 year war thing..
|
If you're looking for someone to reach across party lines
in D.C., look to Hillary and not Obama. After all, Hillary is the compromiser. Outside of D.C., Hillary is a "divider" and Obama draws support from both parties, but I think that's largely a function of his charisma and speaking abilities. I think Obama will likely lose some of his luster after he is in the White House and starts implementing some of his policy objectives.
For example, take Iraq. Some 66% of the American public is "against the war." However, the GOP base gets very upset when people use the word "withdrawal" or "re-deployment." Obama is the candidate most likely to withdraw our troops the fastest, regardless of the "conditions on the ground." When U.S. troops start withdrawing from Iraq and as the progress made by the surge evaporates, expect to see a lot of people up in arms and quite upset with Obama.
I'm still an Obama supporter, but I'm not sure he will be able to unite the country in the way many people think he can. He's certainly going to be a big improvement over GWB, but I don't think he will be the next JFK.