Ian blogged this yesterday but I got a solid e-mail from a friend about this this morning so I’m going to post on it again. My politically savvy pal advises us to prepare for full-blown Obamamania:
He has as much star quality and friendly media coverage as Hillary but, unlike Hillary, he opposed Iraq war from the start. That is a huge advantage.
If he runs–and I believe he will–he will quickly establish himself as the only viable alternative to Hillary and will easily win over Iowa’s very liberal, very anti-war caucus-goers.
He is smooth, good looking, and has an interesting life story. Unlike Howard Dean, he is not prone to gaffes. His candidacy will energize blacks and liberals more than any since Robert Kennedy’s.
Assuming no skeletons emerge from his closet, he’ll be competitive in New Hampshire and Nevada and will win overwhelmingly in South Carolina (30% black) and Delaware (19% black). The race will be over by early February.
Krauthammer’s a skeptic, sort of: he thinks Obama should run now because he’s likely to lose. He’ll end up on the ticket anyway as the VP nominee. If the ticket loses, he’s the heavy favorite in 2012; if it wins, he’s the heavy favorite in 2016.
Republican strategist Ed Rogers is a skeptic too because he thinks Obama is little more than a blank canvas onto which voters can project their hopes. Right — that’s what makes him so appealing. Here’s a clip of him talking about it; it’s been making the rounds on liberal blogs because the lefties think he went out of his way to mention Obama’s middle name.
Either they’re stupid or Rogers is stupid. Although I’ll admit, the name “Robinette” strikes me as more than a little shady.
Vote it out, baby. Let’s do this.
Update: Meanwhile, Rudy’s gone Christianist.
Update: If you’re wondering what Rudy’s doing in that photo, he’s thanking god for Mitt Romney’s exceedingly poor taste in landscapers.