Senator Obama is the best hope that progressive politics has towards, well, anything.  The more blogs I read each day that criticize inconsequential comments made a long time ago or hypothetical running mates makes me concerned:  Is Obama the candidate progressives believe in, or is Obama the candidate that progressives need now?  I find myself leaning towards the latter.

Honestly, are “hardcore progressive voters” (whomever they may be…and what makes them different from me I have no idea) completely disengaged with what is going on in the world?  Do they not see that one candidate wants to end a war and bring troops home whereas another speaks of (and often jokes of) staying and perhaps starting another war in another country?

Why attack Obama for not being progressive enough when these writers know damn well they’ll be far better off with him in office than Senator McCain?  Remember when Al Gore wasn’t “progressive enough” in 2000 so people decided to explore their options?  8 years later, who’s more popular amongst not just progressives but Americans in general?  Al Gore or George Bush?

In short, what I’m saying to liberal concernicists (yes, that’s a word) is that Obama may not, and probably isn’t the answer to every problem facing America.  Hell, he may not even make a dent in domestic policy. But isn’t not making a dent better than  getting worse on the domestic side and the possibility of not just a longer war in Iraq, but  another war somewhere else?  It’s not a lesser of two evils argument, but a realistic argument.  Maybe Obama is a bright shining knight in armor that will rescue us all from all the problems we all face, but America isn’t built for one man to fix all of our problems, and to think one man (or one woman, or one person or whatever) has the power to fix anything on their own is unrealistic.  Public officials are officials elected by the people.  They represent the views of their constituents in accordance with their own views and their constituents’ views.

America is a diverse and beautiful place.  Change can happen, but it happens at it’s own pace.  So, if Obama isn’t progressive enough, then who is?  And could that person possibly win a Presidential election?

I mean, you get a lot of cool stuff like a Secret Service code name, your own plane, tons of free dinners, and the right to pretty much be a jerk during every campaign season. In The Daily Show’s Book “America,” they pretty much hit the nail on the head when it comes right down to the qualifier for being Vice President…live somewhere geographically different than the President.

Democrats, however, have gone weak the past 2 times in their choice for VP: Senator Joe “pretty much a Republican” Lieberman and Former Senator John “I can’t be a dick and smile at the same time” Edwards. Here are my choices for Obama’s VP (not really in any particular order):

• Former General Wes Clark (D-AR)
• North Carolina Governor Mike Easley
• Ohio Governor Ted Strickland
• Former Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack (return of the SACK!)

All for of these men, yes I chose all men, have a few things in common: They’re all older than Obama, they’re from so-called red states, they all have executive experience…oh, and they’re all Clinton Supporters. Granted, I hear a lot of folks talking about my girl Sebelius (look back a couple of months, I’ve mentioned her in the past for other reasons), but lets not kid ourselves, a Democrat won’t win Kansas…and you can’t tell me that Obama/Vilsack wouldn’t be the GREATEST bumper sticker ever.

As for the Republicans, who are slightly more predictable, here’s the four I see:

• Former Mass Governor Mitt Romney
• Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee
• Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush (which would be the best choice I think, if I gave a shit about who Republicans Pick)
• Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour.

Yup, Governors…best choices by far, especially if the top of the ticket is a Senator with a voting record.

Any thoughts? Feel Free to share!

(On a completely different note, I recently rented the new Rambo movie. If you have 85 minutes to spare and feel like watching so many people get shot that it actually makes you laugh I highly recommend it.)

Mckinnon still plans on being a “cheerleader” for McCain, but he’s not going to actively participate in any campaign strategy against Senator Obama. For what it’s worth, I think Mckinnon is one of the best in the business when it comes to persuading voters through ads and crafting a campaign vision, so this is an incredible blow to the McCain campaign.

I’m quite stunned, what do you think?

Does anyone else think that both Bill and Hillary Clinton have destroyed everything we liked about them during the 90s? They really will do anything to win and they never accept defeat. It’s sad to watch them…it’s like watching American Idol auditions: Sometimes you laugh but most of the time you just feel bad for them then you hate yourself for actually watching it…but hot damn that Simon Cowell is quite the witty Brit. I’m developing a drinking game around American Idol, and it mostly involves guessing what sedative Paula Abdul is currently taking.

Speaking of the Clintons, is anyone else as sick of Terry McCauliffe as I am? He never campaigned as hard for John Kerry in 2004 when he was the freaking Democratic Party Chairman…it makes you wonder about all those Clinton “rule the world” conspiracy theories…someone call Mel Gibson, it’s time to make a movie!

Was anyone else NOT shocked with the startling revelation that voters in West Virginia are *gasp* racist? I mean, why is the Clinton camp so happy with the fact that their voters are racist idiots? Also, if any Democrat thinks they’re actually going to win West Virginia in November then give me some of what they’re smoking. Obama was smart to skip it, just a waste of time.

So, I know you’re all wondering what ole Jake has been up to in his absence right? Well, not a whole lot. I pretty much avoided talking about politics as much as possible…especially after Obama lost Ohio and Texas…that was the last straw. Bartenders remember that night, how bad is that? Other than that, my band just finished recording a new album and it’s being mixed as I type, so that’s cool. My mom visited Seattle and, at the age of 55, finally started her first bar tab…and had I not paid it for her she would’ve walked out on her first bar tab and been 86’d from her first bar. After a 6 month boycott I finally got my hair cut…I was starting to look like a West Virginia voter, but hot damn did my mullet blow in the wind!

That’s all I have for now, but I plan on writing more frequently now that things are finally not boring in the world of Politics…I’m sure McCain will say something that pisses me off in no time. So be prepared for a VP candidate breakdown for both parties, tales from the bars of Seattle, and other tidbits I feel like sharing with the interweb (it’s a series of tubes!)

Anyone else agree with that?

Ohio is screwed, more so than most states, and I hate to say it because I’m a buckeye and Ohio is my home, but in order for Ohio to find salvation it will take more than a person in the White House…especially when the person who wants the White House only cares about Ohio when Ohio’s primary is next on the calendar.

Tell me, Senators Obama, McCain, and Clinton: In what way are these jobs going to be created? Out of thin air?

All in all, after printing out the form, it took about four days to get my ballot. For once, Southwest Ohio did something efficient…now if the Bengals can just draft someone who doesn’t suck.

Enjoy the debate tonight. I, like you, am wondering which Hillary Clinton will show up. My good friend Mike said it best last night: “It’s as if she can’t believe she’s losing…it’s pathetic looking.”

Also, while at the post office, someone noticed the “official ballot for Ohio” stamp on my envelope, and when I told her whom I was casting my vote for the entire line applauded and thanked me for not registering in the State of Washington.

I believed that Republicans, in an open primary, would vote for Clinton to make their chances better against a candidate like McCain. After looking at the exit polls, I feel some Republicans, Obamacans if you will, are voting for Obama because they actually believe in him.

Is a change gonna come, as Sam Cooke once immortally sang? Perhaps…this is yet to see. Is Obama a surprising candidate to consultants around America? It’s a resounding Hell Yea. He’s breaking every mold and every traditional breakdown.

The Obama campaign is groundbreaking, and we are, perhaps, all witnesses to change in our lifetime. It’s more than JFK and RFK and MLK combined. It’s a 21st century FDR with Kennedy charisma and King conviction. It’s the new new deal…perhaps the actual Real Deal.

It’s an exciting time to be an American…I hope y’all share my feelings.

Seattle loves Obama, evidenced by 18,000 people packing Key Arena and another 3,000 standing outside, at 11am…on a Friday. It was a marvelous thing to see. Normally candidates get this kind of crowd two weeks before an election, not the day before a freakin’ caucus. This guy is huge. Bono huge.

The Real McCain doesn’t want to run against Barack Obama because, well, he’d lose. When McCain attacks Obama during his victory speeches, he’s actually helping Clinton because McCain could very easily beat Clinton. Don’t believe me? Let’s pick a state. How about, umm, Minnesota.

Minnesota was the only state in 1984 to not vote for Reagan. Let’s look at the matchups: McCain, according to polling data I believe to be quite accurate, is leading Clinton by 5 points. Let’s switch it up: That same poll has McCain losing to Obama by 15 points. So, I ask you this, if McCain could win there with his appeal to conservative/moderate Democrats and Independents, what makes you think he wouldn’t play in Florida/Pennsylvania/Ohio (if you win those 3 you are President, trust me).

So yes, McCain could win, and if Hillary is the nominee he probably will. Not too sure about my Minnesota information? Let’s sweeten the pot: Al Franken (yes that Al Franken - Air America liberal lion comedian) is leading over Senator Norm “I used to be a Democrat” Coleman, but McCain would still win the state if he’s running against Clinton. Hillary’s nomination would be a disaster, and a lot of people would just stay home and accept it.

On top of that, Obama’s campaign runs so smoothly, whereas Clintons is in what appears to be constant disarray. You can tell a lot of about someone by the company they keep, and if there’s one thing the Clintons do a lot of is keep trusted loyal people around them as opposed to, say, the best person for the job. Sound familiar? It’s what the Bush’s do as well.

Everyone, advisers/consultants/ad makers/speech writers/assistants and so on, in Clinton’s current campaign are either from President Clinton’s staff, his 92/96 staff, or Hillary’s staff when she was First Lady. Wonder why the ideas sound the same? Mark Penn, Hillary’s adviser and Bill’s adviser in 92/96, is a smart guy, but it may be a little late to switch ideas. They should’ve bagged that experience garbage after Super Tuesday.

To give an example of how bad the experience line is, former President Clinton stated that Senator Obama “Had nothing to do with the advances made in the 90’s” which, although a reasonable assertion, begs for the response: “Is it 1996 or is it 2008? Were we in a war then and are we in a war now?” Experience, 10 years ago, doesn’t mean much when you really, REALLY, sit down and think about it. If Senator Clinton’s main argument is experience just imagine a debate in which Senator McCain stated, “my opponent claims experience, but as a war veteran and member of Congress for over 20 years I think I have the experience that she’s talking about and then some.”

To go with that, my friend Alexis said something very interesting that I’d like to share: She referred to politics and the people in politics as essentially an “old boys club.” She then said something very interesting, “It’s an old boys club and Hillary is just one of the old boys.”

I agree with her, and I don’t think the reason Hillary is losing has anything to do the fact that she is a woman, it has to do with the fact that she is, as my good friend Connor would say, “old hat.” She’s boring, and not just in the public speaking area (good god, she is horrendous in the speech giving department). She’s an obtuse candidate, and she’s running against and attacking someone who makes people excited about politics, something a lot of people - most everyone I know - didn’t care about for a long time.

In short, I think Obama will win in both Ohio and Texas by more than 5 points. Screw the delegate count, it’s over. I don’t care how close it is, if she loses those two states it’s just over. In fact I think it’s already over. I’m tired of delegate counting, and I’m tired of the Clintons’ arrogance. The only thing Bill Clinton has done during this campaign is damage his reputation.

The campaign essentially boils down to this: Obama is like your favorite band playing a free show with Bono as a special guest. Clinton is like a Ratt reunion show that costs $20 and the band, of course, goes on stage really late and plays like shit. I guess I could’ve picked an awful chick band (Spice Girls) to represent Clinton, but that would’ve been sexist, wouldn’t it?

Not only do I feel that Hillary Clinton would be an ineffective President (if she were to get elected, which I doubt, especially if she’s running against, GASP, McCain…never thought I’d say that), but I also feel she’s a dirty and lousy campaigner who could damage the Democratic party for many years to come.

On paper, I think Hillary’s new strategy vis-a-vis Bill and Obama is brilliant. Let your husband stir the storm while you campaign in other states; perhaps Senator Clinton will even win South Carolina while she appears to be conceding it. But, and this is the problem, the strategy lets us see how a Clinton Redux White House will be run.

One aspect of that is her willingness to put a member of her own party in a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” debacle. As Obama tries to deal with the Clintons, he could stay quiet and let a Former President roll all over him or he could fight back. The only problem is that he’s now running against the wrong Clinton. After the Founder of BET blasted Obama on Hillary’s stage, and every other surrogate that Hillary has blasted Obama, the question we should ask is this: If this is how she runs a campaign, what does this say about the type of President she will be? Will we transform into an Oligarchy? Two President Clintons running the show? Should we fear a family that desires this much power?

By cutting down her colleague with Bill’s help, the strategy leaves Senator Clinton vulnerable to Republican attacks in the lead up to November - and the charge that even if she does ascend to the presidency, she won’t be able to take credit for it herself.

For a long time now, my main argument in private and in writing about her at the Seminal has been that Hillary Clinton couldn’t get elected President: her nomination would force Republicans, who hate her just that much, to vote for anyone with a pulse just to keep her from the Presidency. It’s not because she’s a woman, it’s not because she’s a Senator from New York, it’s just because people simply do not like her as an individual. Simple as that: do not read much further into it. You can put a lot of dressing on a salad, but in the end it’s just a salad.

More damaging, however, would be this: If more people turn out to vote against Senator Clinton and therefore elect either a old man who wants to nuke the world, a Mormon (whose four fighting age sons are doing their duty trying to get their dad elected), or a “Christian” who thinks Dinosaurs weren’t real, you’re also giving them incentive to vote against Democrats further down the ticket.

Since 2004, we’ve made huge advances in the House of Representatives and the Senate, not to mention Governors, State Legislatures and other forms of local Government. Many of us who worked on a bunch of those new messages and found new candidates who could compete and win in Red States against incumbents with more money and more recognition would rather not see our good work undone, and believe me folks if Senator Clinton gets the nomination it will all be undone. Senator Clinton’s possible nomination threatens every advancement the Democratic Party has made since it got beat down in 2002, and the greatest threat that Senator Clinton poses is that if she does become President of the United States, blind hatred will overtake voters’ reason and possibly lead us into a decade of strict new-Republican control.

It took five years of current President Bush blowing it for America to get pissed off enough to throw everyone running for re-election who supported him out of office. Opportunities like that, for someone who works in Politics, come along once in a lifetime…and if you do it right, you only need that opportunity once. It should surprise no one that many of the newly elected Democratic Senators from the class of 2006 are publicly backing Senator Obama, citing “Fresh Ideas, Change, and he won’t hurt the Party in November.” Senator Clinton can’t campaign with new Senate candidates in red states (such as Governor Mark Warner in Virginia). Senator Obama, even Senator Edwards, could most certainly do that.

The most valuable asset a state campaign (Senate, Governor, Congressional) has is a popular Presidential candidate. A popular President candidate can raise money and awareness by making a one paragraph statement about a candidate. If someone running for Congress the first time can’t afford to be seen with a Presidential Candidate because it could hurt his/her campaign, that’s a real problem. That’s what happened with many Republican candidates in 2006, and that’s why a lot of them got beat.

To finish this off, how a candidate runs a campaign gives a fairly decent indication of how they’ll lead, since they, for the most part, are running the campaign. Look at all the cheap crap Bush pulled in 2000…look at his Presidency…a far cry from Compassionate Conservatism. But I guess that all depends on your definition of Compassion. Can we really expect that Hillary, once in office, wouldn’t lead like she campaigns?