WHAT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE TO DO TO WIN

Today John Edwards endorsed Berock Obama for President breaking his long silence on the subject. Hopefully and presumably this means the race really is over because now Edwards' deligates will be released to go for Obama on the first ballot, but I haven't heard this for a fact. But the democrats aren't home free. I was just reading my own material on the Democratic convention hoping to get something inspiring to pass along. Well, if you thought my endorsement of the Republicans at their convention was less than sizzeling, I was downright put off by the democratic convention. Media coverage of conventions pretty much sucks these days anyhow, and I wasn't on the internet back then. So often it was just commentators flapping their gums reinterperating everything that went on anyhow. But I was pissed at Kerry because I regarded him as a liar. I believed the swift boat people. Not that I believed all their political commentary that went along with their charges but I believed the substance of what they said. Next I didn't like and don't as a rule like conventions of the democrats being a parade of special interest cases like people with AIDS or gay activists or anything smacking of that. I also don't much go for any speech made that sounds like their putting on a parade of whiners and mal-contents. Neither did I much like that psudo military stuff like "John Kerry reporting for duty" as if he were "Just as macho as George Bush. Neither did I like that "Send me" speech, done along the same vein. Not to quote dead people but Stewart Sutcliffe announced he would vote for Ralph Nader in the fall. Of course Stewart is more of a government "activist" than I am approving of things like the nutrition police and it's the government's duty to promote the health of it's citizens- - and all that stuff about how employees can't even smoke in their own homes, to get employee insurance rates down. John Lennon didn't like Kerry either, regarding his speeches as too hawkish for his blood. The thing that Kerry did all throughout the campaign was to say how he's really for the war and all. Nobody except Howard Dean was advocating the withdrawal of troops from Iraq in those days. I saw the race of 2004 as a choice between someone who basically is in control and knows what they are doing and has had success both domestically and abroad- - - verses the other party that can't seem to find their asshole with a high powered telescope. In short the democrats the whole time ran as a party that just expected to lose. Hillary not running in 2004 was signal enough to many people that the Democrats' chances this year of 2004 were pretty much doomed from the git go.

So what do the democrats have to do to win? First of all they can't do what Hillary has been doing and that is trying to placate the inveterate (and confederate) racists of West Virginia. As long as you see the ignorant and the prejudice setting the tone and framing the debate, you will never win. You have to do something brave; you have to Ignore them! West Virginia is just not relavent for the 21st. Century. Neither would I court Hillary to be a major part of the campaign. Rather than beg her for her support if there is any begging to be done it should be done by Hillary promicing to "behave" if she's allowed any part in the campaign. There is no way she should be considered for Vice President. To many having a woman AND a black is just perceived as a "loser ticket" and the democrats need to shed the tag of loser. There is no way Hillary deserves to be Vice President, not that she would even want the job. Obama needs to signal a clear break with the past and there is no better way to do that than make a clear break with Hillary. I think having a lot of debates will help Obama because it will emphasize Mc Cain's age the way the Kennedy - Nixon debates highlighted all of Nixon's physical shortcomings. Obama needs to campaign in areas where he's done well in the primaries like the northern plains states and in the middle Atlantic and places like Virginia and North Carolina where he did well. He needs to do the intellectual Thom Hartman approach to provide Americans with an adacademic education of what our problems are in this country and how they can be solved. I would declare all out war on the medical insurance companies. I would also declare all out war on the secretive policies of the Bush adminestration of unauthorized wire taps and torture policies and denial of detainees their Civil Rights. Obama has not enphisized this strongly enough in the past. I would also do a full court press on Mc Cain's economic plans for the nation, while trying to say as little about my own plans as I can get away with. People need to see Mc Cain as lost and alone without any support for any of his ideas. I would suggest talking fast and firing a lot of questions at him and make him appear old and dottering when he is slow to answer. I would certainly keep using this phrase of "The third term of the Bush adminestration". I would also highlight ethics reform in congress and do an all out attack on lobbyests. These are some of my ideas. I would also do frequent private survays for my eyes only to get a pulse on where the public's head is at and which speeches are resonating and which speeches aren't. In terms of moral issues such as gay marriage and abortion, I wish Obama would say as little as possible about this. I don't think the American Public is "pro abortion" and I don't think they're anti marriage.