A lovely, sunny day in Washington, D.C. today and people in the Logan Circle area were out enjoying dining, shopping and having a promenade. Interestingly, but not surprisingly, Obama campaign workers were out leafleting, holding signs and reminding passers-by that our primary is Tuesday. In the neighborhood walk that followed, I saw several (apartment-)house signs, but only one for Clinton. (And one for Ron Paul, but no other candidates of any party.)
As I mentioned earlier, I am happy for this outpouring not only because I support Barack Obama and intend to vote for him, but because it is the biggest outpouring I’ve seen for a federal election in the District of Columbia. While outsiders use my home as an eponym (Washington insiders or using D.C. to mean the federal government or executive departments) for the kind of government people in the rest of the country dislikes, recall those Reps and Senators are your products, not ours; we don’t have voting representation in Congress. So we tend to get forgotten as a real place with real people, unless some Hill Republican wants to start experimenting on us in a way that wouldn’t fly back home, like school vouchers. Or when the city powers might want to make an opinion that would rattle selfsame Hill Republicans, like voting to legalize medical marijuana or recognizing out-of-state gay marriages. I love living in America’s last colony.
We reliably give our three electoral votes to the Democrat, which helps us have more of a pledged delegate count than Alaska or North Dakota. Respect, at last! So a contested Democratic primary is big news, and I intend to scan returns for the candidates ward by ward, and in my ward, precinct by precinct.
But my (eastern) half of Ward 2 is custom-made for an Obama victory because the residents fall into one or more of the following categories (in alphabetical order): affluent, black, college-educated, young. Many are gay, too, and that might skew for Clinton if the conventional wisdom is right but heaven help me I can’t think that it is or why it should be.
I’m predicting a 75% win for Obama in my precinct and will report when the result are in.
Is Clinton really the best choice for the gay community to skew towards? I’m having a hard time thinking of anything specific and constructive that she’s done for us.
Her husband helped to give us such ambivalent policies as “Dont’s Ask Don’t Tell”, and more hostile polices like the so-called “Defense Of Marriage Act”.
-Derek
I don’t think she’s the best choice at all; rather, I’m echoing what Andrew Sullivan and others have said. That is, the major gay organizations have been too cosy with the Clintons, especially Human Rights Campaign.
Sounds like the old “you don’t have a choice” politics to me. But I do have choice (and I don’t have a single yellow-equals-sign-on-blue thing in my house now.)
OK I’m nuts but I voted for Dennis Kucinich (before he dropped out). I’ll vote for the underdogs if I like their platform.
But this country seriously needs some real political diversity; Dems and Repubs are basically mirror images of each other any more.
Nader may yet step into the equation. We’ll see.
But, with stealing votes being so commonplace, and voting machines that have been tampered with, well, this is why I’m personally convinced that John McCain will be our next Prez, even though I loathe the idea.
Been saying that for a couple of weeks now…mark my words. :wink:
Nader? Spare us, ye saints.