The 2008 Republican National Convention was more confused and unfocused than any other convention of either party in recent memory. Sen. John McCain knows it.

In complete contrast, the GOP conventions of 2000 and 2004 both had a set goal, and they reached it. In 2000, it was the creation of the passionate conservative. Gov. Bush promised a satisfied America that he would continue the growth, prosperity, and peace of the 90's, but with the home grown moral compass of the average American to bring back integrety to the Oval Office. The convention of 2004 was much different. The goal was to remind Americans of the horrors and realities of the post 9-11 world, and the determination and success of Bush's leadership in keeping America safe. The passionate conservative phenomenon won two unwinnable elections for a party that unashamefuly took America back the Reaganomics of deficit spending. Democrats must not forget those lessons, even if the Republicans themselves have.

John McCain is a republican of another generation. He has never fully identified with the Reagan conservatives or the Bush elites. McCain is now the head of a party not yet willing to admit the wrong doings of a failed administration, so will find it difficult to give the power of full leadership to that of McCain. The Senator from Nevada is fully aware of this challenge. If he didnt before the convention, he sure knows it now.

Neither convention made an attempt to sway and rewrite the narrative of this election to focus on the issues. Things are still more about personalities,rather than the lives of struggeling Americans. It is shameful, and irresponsible.

First of all, congratulations to Gov. Palin for making history as the GOPs first female vp candidate. We all should recognize what a step this is for the GOP and America.

However, we are losing our focus. Obamas numbers, as we have seen, go up whenever the election is about the issues. Obama and supporters alike need to get back to that. McCain cannot win if the election is about the issues and the solutions.

If this election is about personality-i.e. character- McCain will win thanks to the midwest. Obama needs to get his focus and talk about the economy, healthcare, education, and hammer away on his tax policy. As someone from the great state of Ohio, I know first hand that people will vote for the candidate who talks about job creation. Obama needs to talk about the 5 million jobs he wants to create. If he doesnt, he will lose big here.

Obama supporters...

During the primary, you talked more about character than you did about the issues. You cannot do that in the general election. Outline and explain in simple english Obamas plans for America to your friends and family. Dont go around bashing on Palins daughter, YOU WILL LOSE VOTES. Talk about the economy, job creation, and healthcare. Hammer away on those three, and youll get the votes Obama needs.

We cannot make the same mistakes of 2000 and 2004. This year HAS to be different. Obama-Biden need to win.

I like Sen. Joe Biden. I like his fire-in-the-belly approach to politics. I like what he did in the 90's with the Balkans. Im sure he'll make a great vice president if the ticket wins in November.

But...

Obama has missed yet another great, and largely very important opportunity. Just name one other candidate who won over 18 million votes and has 1500 delegates. You cant. The golden chance to ensure the party unified, all those Hillary supporters, would have had the chance to move to Obama, if Hillary was AT LEAST vetted. She was not. She wasnt even asked for her opinion on things. She hasnt seen respect. And neither has her supporters.

There remains a great chance that Obama could lose half of all Hillary voters. Thats over 6 million voters who will vote for McCain or will stay home in November. My guess, most of them will just stay home. Because we dont like McCains economic policy, but many of us are just not sure about Obama either. Its a real problem that Obama doesnt know how, or doesnt even care to know how to win over the middle class vote. Its the same problem democrats have had for years.

Im deeply dissapointed. Obama is a good candidate, but he could be great. He has to show respect to the middle class before he gets the middle class vote. And he needs that vote to win. Snubbing Hillary and trying his best to destroy Bill CLintons legacy, is not the way to do it. Its the way to lose. Obama should do more to pay off her debt, put more of her positions on the platform, and show us some respect.

He should do something for his brother in Africa too. If I was in the position Obamas in, and I had a brother living in a shack, I would do a lot more for him. Its family. I dont care if you dont know much about him. You should help.

Im sure Obama has some convictions in there somewhere.

Yes McCain is old, and yes, Bush will do somethings that will make it easier for the republican canidate to win. But, lets not understimate McCains political astuteness. Theres a reason he has been in politics for so long. Yes there have been books written in the past 8 years about the neocons doing everything for political reasons, but most of America hasnt read any of them. McCains age-dont fool yourself-can be an asset. If he does it right, as I think he can, he'll turn it around and make it work for him. We cannot underestimate this man. He'll say the things that most Americans agree with:new energy;safer world;healthcare;free markets;doing away with No Child Left Behind. People are going to here those things, not some pages written in a book authored by a liberal talk show host. This is going to be a tough fight, and Obama and all of us better be up for it.

Despite what a lot of people say, Obama cannot use McCains age against him. Obama already has a tough time winning over the senior vote,to say the least, he would squander all hopes of any gain if he went after McCaim on that issue of age. He cannot do it. The fight against McCain is not going to be easy. If anything, its going to be among the toughest elections yet. This election will be about jobs. Who can create the jobs people need? Iraq will become more about the overall international picture. The refugee crisis in the neighboring countries; the middle east peace process; oil deals between China and Russia; and of course, the arms trade on the black market. Al Queda is a threat, and Obama needs to come out every chance he can get, to say just that. 2008 will be about the markets. Thats right, the markets. It will be about how speculation drives up oil prices, and what we should do about it. 2008 will be about public transportation funding, and other related initiatives. Education should not be overlooked. The swing voter cares a lot about it. Its an important issue that has far reaching effects into the future. 2008 will be about No Child Left Behind, and Obama needs to come forward with a detailed plan on what can be done about it. I cant say it enough... Details, details, details.... people vote for the person with the answers. If you cant give them that, you will lose. It really is that simple.

CNN and every single news media has reported that a meeting between Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton has taken place. For anyone who has ever read a political biography might understand the sheer significance of this event.   Read More »

One of the major reasons I supported Hillary was that she told me how she was going to pay for her policy proposals. I understood the plans, I understood where the money was coming from, I could take them and explain to other voters why they should support such programs. Obama, on the other hand, hasnt told me how he plans to finance these endeavors. Not only that, but much of his plans are slim in substance. I see plenty of promises and rosey end results, but I see little explaination in the way to which we are to get to those results. This is a serious problem. In 2004, we saw the same thing with John Kerry. I had a tough time convincing people to vote for him, because I would always be asked "how is it going to be paid?" And everytime I was left to say "oh he'll repeal the Bush Tax Cuts". And everytime people would look at me with a smirk and say "thats it?" The American people will only vote for the person that convinces them that their plans can both work and be paid for. If you cant answer those two simple questions, you will lose. You will lose every single time. We shouldnt make the same mistake. So, Obama should beef up his proposals, and explain to us all how he plans to finance them. Otherwise, get ready to welcome John McCain, the 44th President of the United States of America.

On one hand, an historical moment has come before us as the first african american in American politics has reached the set number of delegates needed to win the party nomination. On the other hand, another historical moment has come before us, one that is less positive: women are not yet recognized by the Democratic Party as legitimate contenders for the presidency. Its a day of great joy, but also a day of great sadness. The superdelegates should have allowed the voters to decide the nomination, but they did not. Personally, for me, Im deeply offended that the party nor Obama does not value my vote. I have been withstanding fire from my republican friends since 2000, and now this is the way in which I am to be repaid? This party needs to change.

What if Hillary wins both South Dakota and Montana? Both states were long believed to be shoe ins for Obama, but now, Hillary is within the margin of error in Montana with 44% to Obamas 48%; and Hillary is ahead in South Dakota with 60% to Obamas 34%. And I repeat, these two states were for a long time, shoe ins for Obama. This means Obama has lost steam after losing 7 out of the last 8 primaries. If he loses tomorrow night, he will have lost 9 out of 10. No matter how much twist you put on it, that would not be good for a man that claims to already be the nominee. Superdelegates would need to rethink this whole thing if she wins big. She would clearly be ahead in the popular vote-even more so than now-, and will have slimmed the delegate margin considerabley. This race would leave Obama in the dust. If Hillary manages to win South Dakota, again, the race would need to be rethought by superdelegates about Obamas viability as a candidate. They will ask 'has he lost it? has he lost steam? should we really take this battered candidate to the general election?' They will ask, and Hillary will stand there clearly as the stronger candidate with momentum. Obama has tried to buy the nomination at every step, but it wont be enough if Hillary wins tomorrow night. If Hillary loses both states tomorrow night, superdelegates will still need to consider Hillarys mastery of the popular vote; her supporters; and her electoral strategy. A big loss tomorrow night wouldnt be the end for her. It would just make things tougher. Effectively, the only way this nomination will be decided is when the superdelegates choose. I just hope for the sake of America and the sake of the party, they pick the candidate that the people have chosen. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is that candidate.

In all my readings, and participation in this political party, I have believed that this party was interested in valuing every vote. The heart and soul of our democracy is to count the peoples vote, and yet, the American peoples party is going back on that golden idea.

Should Florida and Michigan count? Why shouldnt they count? If you ask me, if a person takes the effort out of their day to make a vote, that vote should count. Would it be right for that vote to be ignored because a very few in high places decided a technical rule was more important? Rules are rules, but a vote is also a vote. And in a democracy, a vote is worth more than a rule in party books. In this primary, we're not talking about just one vote, no, we're talking about over 3 million.

If your an Obama supporter, its easy to understand why you wouldnt want the vote to count. Your guy would lose the nomination contest. Giving up on the idea of one vote, one person is one heck of a price for backing a candidate. A supporter of any candidate should see the value in the vote over any one candidate.

For the sake of the democratic party and america, the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee will rule on the side of democracy by counting each and every vote casted. Anything less would be tragic.

The Democratic Party can win the White House again.
We just have to be smart in order for that to happen.

Governor Clinton learned from the failures of McGovern, Mondale, and Dukakis, and went on to win the White House after 12 years of republican rule. What were those lessons? While Governor, he was elected to head the National Governors Association and directed the DLC, working to give the party a new direction and a backbone. Hard liberals attacked him every step of the way during his '92 campaign, accusing him of being a closet republican. Despite those accusations, he went on to win the White House. His lessons learned didnt end there. He went on to become the first democrat since FDR to win two consecutive terms. That was not an accident. He didnt run around the country blind-folded begging for votes. President Clinton went to those states that voted for him in '92, and received the confidence of the voters who agreed with his positions and the positions of the DLC. Clinton didnt ignore anyone voter demographic, he didnt snub his rivals supporters, he went in and worked for every vote he could get. Once he won his second term, everyone was convinced the democrats finally learned how to win.
Then came 2000.
Al Gore, despite the fact Bill Clinton enjoyed the highest approval ratings of all recent presidents, found it justifiable and smart to not use the president on the stump as he made his run for the oval office. Al Gore ran the type of campaign Dukakis would have ran, and subsequently, lost. You can argue he actually won with the popular vote, but he lost nonetheless. Once Bush began his first term, every democrat vowled "not again". Everyone talked about organising better, and appreciating the only modern democratic president. 2004, while looking like a bag-in for the party, democrats would go in with a sloppy candidate and lose.
John Kerry was repeatedly slow in responding to attacks true and false, and ran a campaing reminescent of 1980, 1984, and 1988. Even those men who ran in the '80s believe Kerry made the same mistakes they had made. So, the democratic party lost, and America lost. Again, we all vowled "not again".
Now comes 2008, and we're in a tight battle between two candidates who resemble the two sides of the party:one that can win, and the one that will lose.
Hillary Clinton, in no surprise to anyone, has run the type of campaign her husband ran in his bid for the presidency. With her quick responses to attacks, her ability to take hits and bounce back, and her issue oriented smarts, she has proven a tireless bear in the line of fire. Obama has run the campaign of slow or no responses, and reluctant accountability in the face o inquiry. In total detachment to history, the media has given this new and young politician slack thats unrivaled. He holds more events that are large than small and personable. He has vowled to only run for the african american vote and the college vote in the general election, in the direct makeup of the McGovern-Dukakis coalition. The blue-collor swing vote has no place in his general election agenda, effectively throwing away the support that backed Bill Clinton the first and second time. Sen. Obama may not have learned the very lessons that gave America a chance during the 90's.
To conclude, this primary really should be about the two candidates general election plans. Who has the strategy to win? Thats what we should be asking. We shouldnt be constently distracted by who said what and what did they mean or not mean. This contest-a tie by all standards-should reveal and explore who has the best general election map. In respect to Obama, he is willing to give up on Ohio,PA,Kentucky,New York,West Virginia,Michigan,and Oregon. His plan is to go after the states that have not-in recent history-ever gone over to the democratic ticket. Hillary, on the other hand, is willing to work for all votes. Her general election map expands her husbands map in the 90's, which if nominated, she would give McCain a serious run.
This is about historical lessons. Which candidate has the strategy that works? That wins elections? Which candidate has the smarts to win? Who will govern? It wont be the candidate who has failed to learn those ever painful lessons of long ago. We shouldnt repeat ourselves, we're smarter than that.