Michigan And Some Ponderings

The Michigan primary will be held tomorrow, and should be very interesting to watch.

On the Republican side, it's Romney's home state. He was Governor of Massachusetts, but he was originally from Michigan. He looks to do well there, and needs to get a win for the publicity. At the moment, he's way ahead in terms of primary delegates, but somehow the perception is that he's struggling. Huckabee and McCain are looking for more momentum to build on their previous wins, but neither is looking too good in Michigan. Fred Thompson won big in the latest Republican debate, finally showing some fire and calling out some of the other candidates for leaning too far to the left. Most of the results that I've seen have shown a nice bump for Thompson, with most people really liking his message and ability to stand firm on principles. If he continues down that same path, it could mean good things for him and the party (meaning the average Republican voter), who is almost desperate to find a conservative candidate they can finally rally around.

On the Democrat side, it's become a big-time slash-fest. Obama and Hillary Clinton have been sniping at each other over race and gender, and it's gotten pretty vicious. Clinton struck low by saying that "Dr. [Martin Luther King, Jr.]'s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act," adding that "it took a president to get it done." In response, Obama said, "Senator Clinton made an unfortunate remark, an ill-advised remark, about King and Lyndon Johnson. I didn't make the statement. I haven't remarked on it. And she, I think, offended some folks who felt that somehow diminished King's role in bringing about the Civil Rights Act. She is free to explain that. But the notion that somehow this is our doing is ludicrous." According to Rasmussen Reports, there is a sharp divide along demographic lines, which is partly why there is such a back and forth between Obama and Clinton - Clinton is gathering a lot of support from women, while Obama is pulling huge numbers of African Americans. Both candidates are seen as viable, as well as occupying a minority status, so it'll be an interesting contest to watch.

The other wrinkle here is that because Michigan moved its primary up to January 15th (it has traditionally been a part of "Super Tuesday" in early February), the Democrat National Committee (DNC) stripped Michigan of its primary delegates, meaning Michigan voters will have no say in selecting the Democrat presidential nominee. The RNC stripped Michigan of half its delegates, too, so it will still matter, though not as much as in previous election cycles. But, in order to derail Hillary Clinton's post-New Hampshire momentum, it sounds like the other candidates are trying to rally all their troops to vote 'uncommitted' in an attempt to still deny Clinton a win, even though she's technically the only Democrat on the ballot. Should be interesting to see what happens there.

I've also heard and seen that, according to polls, McCain's momentary surge is already ebbing in places like Michigan and South Carolina, the next two primary states, but the MSM is still pushing him as the 'front runner'. Makes you wonder why, doesn't it? Has the MSM abandoned the Huckabee train in favor of a McCain train?

As I was pondering this information, a couple things occurred to me that I want you to consider. Take a moment to think about the nature of the broadsides being exchanged in the two parties. On the Republican side, you have spirited debates about issues, about records, and about policies. On the Democrat side, you have spirited debates about race, gender, and about who's more 'electable'. I reach two conclusions from this information. First, which party do you think truly has the best interests of the American people at heart? Which party is addressing the issues and how to resolve them? While the Democrats are arguing about who is more politically viable and who should align with whom because of their demographics, the Republicans are debating statistics, facts, and previous records. The answer is obvious. [On a side note, what the Democrats are doing is called identity politics - basically, voting for someone because of who they are rather than what they stand for. Huckabee has been trying to play that game on the Republican side, and is now starting to see a backlash for it because of his weaknesses on several issues.]

Anyway, back to my second conclusion. Which party is widely perceived as being racist and sexist? The Republican party, right? If that's true, then why are the only discussions/attacks on race and gender occurring in the Democrat party? True, there aren't any African American or woman candidates on the Republican side, but I would take this opportunity to point out that it was a Republican who put Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court, and it was a Republican who put Condoleezza Rice in the post of National Security Adviser and Secretary of State. The Democrats have quite a history of trying to subvert African Americans running for higher office on both the state and federal level (and trying to destroy them in if they get there - think Robert Bork), whereas Bush has had just about the most diverse cabinet in American history. The Democrat party has long been known for the position that minorities are their highest priority, but their actions suddenly change when those minorities start reaching for higher posts. The Clintons -- who in many ways are the face of the modern Democrat party -- have launched racial attacks on Obama, providing current evidence of how the legacy of the Democrat party actually treats minorities. Another wrinkle on the Democrat side is that of the Hispanic vote. Hispanics are the political flavor of the moment, and Democrats have been hell-bent on gaining Hispanic favor through amnesty, benefits for illegal aliens, etc. Where does that leave the African American segment of the population? Second class and second place.

They should come on over to the Republican party, where there's plenty of opportunity to everyone who is willing to work hard and make something of themselves. Though the perception isn't there, the actual history is.

There's my two cents.