Washington File

Last comment before I get back to work.
I was impressed that Obama DID NOT pick Hillary if he is running on a message of new politicking.
I was let down by his choice of a running mate based on the same reasoning.
I think he should have gone for someone younger and not a political servant for the last many years.
You cannot inspire the young if you go back to the old ways.
I know it would have been hard, but it sure would have impressed me if he had remained consistent on at least that issue.

Canuckfan71 - I dont think that should be the question. The question should be is "America ready to put the BEST man in the White House"?
If Obama is the man, fine, but I have my reservations.
Having said that, McCain does not fill me with hope but he is certainly not Bush Lite.
It will be interesting but I dont think America should vote for Obama just because he is black.

I watched the hard-core democrats have their love-in. These chimps would unconditionally cheer for anyone spouting the party rhetoric (just as hard core republican monkeys would cheer for their man - and yes, even Bush could probably find enough goobers to rant hysterically over his dribblings - 20% of half of 300 million is still 30 million supporters - how hard to find 80,000 enthusiastic wannabelievers in that number?)
The party principle is in serious trouble in Canada and the US.
People should be voting on the issues, not the parties and should force politicians to do so.
Obama can dream and talk about pulling the country together but he has zero track record of working with the other side and he is as extreme a liberal as you will find.
I cannot believe how those groupies could cheer Bill Clinton (who just wont go away) contradict everything he said about Obama when he was running against Hillary.
The character Two-Face in the Dark Knight would be best played by him (except that I doubt he was ever once a noble person).
If McCain picks a woman to run as vice, it will be interesting to see what advantage that may give him.
And to my fellow canuck who thinks that because we have minorities elected to represent us BUT have NEVER been PM is anything but astonishing in this supposed multicultural country WHERE it SHOULD have happened first, give your head a colossal shake.
For it to happen in the states first is simply AMAZING, considering the histories of both countries.
And to the intellectually challenged who called Harper a Bush clone, wake up. Harper is no more a bush clone than you are a Chretien clone.
Following your logic, if you share a pint or two with the head of the KKK, does that make you a white supremist clone?

It is truly a moving moment when a black man is in a position to become the leader of the most powerful country in the world, considering the history and treatment of blacks in the United States.
Having said that, my personal feeling, backed up by Robt.'s post, is that Obama is severely underqualified and is an example of affirmative action.
Ask yourself this.
If a blond haired, blue-eyed, white christian boy named John Smith had said and done everything Obama had done, would he even have got his name on the ticket?

Given that a Canadian of any ethnic minority has never even had a possibility of becoming Canada's prime minister, the argument about American's being too racist to vote in a man of color are more true of Canada than America, right? Barack Obama is halfway there and as I recall no person of color has ever had this possibility of becoming the leader of a majority white western nation. Secondly, for those arguing that the American voter is stupid for voting in Bush twice, you guys voted for Harper who is basically a Bush clone. The hypocricy and lack of self-criticism by Canadians is mind-boggling. CANADA MEET MIRROR!!!!!!!!!

Great comments everyone. However, you're over complicating all the issues.

There's only 1 issue to debate.

IS AMERICA READY TO PUT A MAN OF COLOUR IN THE WHITE HOUSE?

I agree with Mr Smitek. Kevin Luther please return to Moose Jaw or wherever you belong. Your whining is a real bore.

The latest story that the media are trying to ignore about Obama is that his own step brother lives in poverty in the slums of Nairobi.
Even with a three to one ratio of media coverage on Obama he's barely tied with McCain.
Those who are not in the ivory towers are starting to see what a disgrace the media have become and how they are being dishonest in their coverage of the presidential race.
And they won't like finding out they have been lied to by the media.
Get used to it, McCain will be president.

Here is another perspective. Why hasn't McCain sealed the deal?

Appears Robt of Toronto would prefer the lunacy of the last 8 years to continue. Just about all items on his list with a little rewording bur essentially the same meaning can be applied to mccain. And please don't trot out the phony war hero crap. According to mccains own votes on torture he wasn't, he was subjected to "enhanced interrogation". It's not a basis for good judgement as a president.

Hillary would better serve the U.S. in the Supreme court than as VP and if Obama really has nerve, he'll appoint Bill too. That will really stymie the fear mongers and the right wing lunatics who have been running the show for too long and long term, may well be the only way to save the Republic by re-establishing habeas corpus, dumping immunity for telecoms etc. and holding up to ridicule the cowards who took these and so many other protections away.

Obama is woefully unqualified to be president on the following objective measures:

1) He has no executive experience. He has not managed any business or any government of any size.

2) He has no military experience although he would be the Commander-in-Chief of the world's most powerful military.

3) He has virtually no Senate experience. He as been there only three years. He began his presidential campaign after one year!

4) His voting record is the most liberal of all 100 senators (according to the National Journal). He has never voted against party lines.

5) In those three years he has been a US Senator he has never worked with Republicans to accomplish anything which is contrary to his campaign promises that he would do so as president.

6) He has no foreign affairs or diplomatic experience. Going to school in Indonesia doesn't count.

7) His pledge to meet "without pre-condition" America's enemies who happen to be the world's worst tyrants is absurd and breathtakingly dangerous.

8) He belonged for twenty years to a church of racists and whackjobs. If a white candidate belonged to a church holding similar views he (or she) would be toast.

9) For him to say he didn't know the views of Rev Wright, his mentor and sounding board for 20 years, beggars belief. He is stupid or lying.

10) He has said outrageous things that the press is not calling him on, like: a) the US has 57 states (this is documented - check YouTube) and b) his uncle liberated Auschwitz (it was the Russians) and he had no uncle in the war (his mother was an only child).

As I have reached the max numer of chararcters I will continue this list in another post.

Kelvin Luther: I guess my reference to a man who is typical of the white upper class male of America but in brown skin did offend you? I can assure you that being married to a woman who is a visable minority and my son having 23 of her chomozomes, doesn't hold much water as to my racist intonations, you try and allude to! I think it time we stopped pretending that just because the guy is Half Black, Obama himself is playing the race card to a tee. Yet in reality he is not a black man, unless you want to consider only 23 of his Nigerian Fathers Chromozomes! He is a man of darker skin due to a mixed relationship of his mother and father's copulation. ISn't it that we could also ellude to the fact he is "White" since his mother was of that race? Who is actually playing the race card here? The mainstream media? Obama, because it is working in His favour? Isn't time we put aside these petty ways and realised that people like Obama are no different than the stuffed white shirts that McCain and Bush represent. Unfortunately or Fortunately for him, his skin colour is what is making him so much more remarkable than the great orator he is with little or no substance!
And I aggree with you wholeheartedly as to what Bush and his cronies have done to capitalize on 9/11 with Haliburton and Blackwater etc.!

Just the Rock Star isn't much better! Wait and see as my words may be prophetic!

And since race did hit a nerve with me, Why is it the best Golfer in the world is also cast only as a black man when his mother gave him 23 Thai chromozomes ? :) Just a thought?

It is unfortunate that although most people could tell you what (they think) Obama stands for, many dismiss McCain as "more-of-the-same Bush-type-of-stuff".
I vote NDP both federally & provincially because I feel that I can trust who I vote to send represent my interests in the government.
Unfortunately I feel that much of Obama's support is coming from people who are way too excited about a young black man possibly winning the presidency. His message is vague and yet people clamour to him. I don't get it. Apparently he is charismatic.
McCain, on the other hand is almost completely opposite who I am as a person yet I feel that he has substance and experience.
The best thing about this election is that either way we will be rid of Bush.

In any case, this will be great TV in November.

In 1840, de Tocqueville warned that Americans will never vote for someone who is smarter than the average voter.
Sad but true.

If the GOP nominated Condi Rice, they would definitely "one up" the Dems.

She is black.

She is a woman. (obviously)

She would better than Hilary and Obama put together.

A few have commented that Champ's asessment of the polls is somehow wrong - one person asking what polls this columnist is reading. But he didn't say Obama was behind in the polls overall - merely that he was trailing in key states. One need keep in mind the American Electoral College, after all.

Indeed, this analysis can't really be that far off - the American news media has been quite taken with Hillary being placed on the ballot at the DNC. The Daily Show's host even characterized the event as a spectacle ready to "implode". But these things can't help but be carefully choreographed in advance and if there was any real danger of the Clintons doing anything to pour salt into the wounds suffered during the campaign, the Democrat's wouldn't actually be so stupid as to give them prime-time speaking slots.

On the contrary, I suspect we'll see some sort of reconcilliation being staged here and an earnest attempt by both the Clinton and Obama camps to mend any rifts that still exist. Besides, if Hillary has any designs on the White House left, she'll not want the albatross of spoiling Obama's chance at the Presidency to be left dangling about her neck.

The world is full of dirty histories, no matter the country or race, Canadian or American etc etc; humankind has taken a toll on itself.

All one can hope for is someone to step up and lead their country with the best intentions for their citizens.

But the corruption in politics is so great we find it difficult to trust something that sounds "too good to be true" or "new". Instead, we're happy to accept the familiar paradigm.

But the corruption in the human spirit is great, is centric. We claim to serve the interests of others but we know, truly, there is always some degree of self-serving we are unwilling to part with.

For me, most politicians, no matter their sincerity, are forced to compromise their values and plans to achieve an accepted model of self-serving behaviour and the behaviour required to serve those they fought to win over.

Excuse my blathering -

Oh yes, and to Mark Smitek, you highlight some important points. The history of the US and Mexico (and Canada)is great, and we can get into the history of taking land and making borders; relocating businesses and developing highways.

The bottom line is that massive number of illegal immigrants entering your country has much to do with the vast improvement in the quality of life versus the disparity they face in Mexico: if I were in their position I would make the run too.

May I suggest to anyone willing, please travel and live and work outside your comfort level. A vacation in a resort is not experiencing a culture.

Thank you,
Brendan

I find it interesting that Obama's campaign is struggling because he as no empathy for the people. Now I don't believe that for a moment, but it's the perception of the American voter that counts. If this is the case then it must be because Obama comes over as more intelligent than the average voter and god forbid America should elect a intelligent President.

But at least Obama pulled himself up by his boot straps. McCain was born into wealth, dumped his first wife so he could marry into more wealth. It's hard to understand how a guy who doesn't remember how many houses he owns(10) or what kind of car he drives (a Cadillac) can feel empathy for anyone.

Obama may not be the messiah that some people think he is, but as an alternative to McCain there is doubt that he would make a better President. If McCain is elected, America's downward slide into mediocrity will continue and American's will truly get the government deserve.

It doesn't matter who becomes the next President. Whoever is elected will continue on the same path and will throw the USA into more internal fiscal turmoil. The next President will not be re-elected in 2012. I wonder if anyone in the mass-media listened to Obama's Berlin speech. He said that he would take combat troops out of Iraq but said nothing about the occuping troops. I assume that they won't be going anywhere soon, they will be staying put in Iraq. Those combat troops won't be going home either, they'll just do a right-hand turn and end up in Afghanistan. Obama is a product of the system and he isn't going to bite the hand that feeds him.

One simple reason because American voters are stupid. You can dazzle them with shiny new ads promos and scare tactics and that's all it take. "Obama is the scary monster in the closet and he's going to convert you all to Islam and take away your gun and make gay marriage mandatory"

Americans, the world is watching.
Please, please, please ... don't mess it up again!

Mr. Smitek,

I can prove even to someone with a grade six education that your health care system is a joke. I will do it with a Republican argument. The moment people start agitating for universal coverage, the amoral corporate shills of the Republican party use COST as an argument against it.

Let's examine that argument:

The U.S. pays more per patient than any country on earth. They are the only Western democracy that I'm aware of that doesn't cover everyone. Independent studies consistently rank the results of the system far below the top (last I recall was somewhere around 20th).

I have an insurance company, making profit, paying another company to keep track of its list of acceptable doctors, making a profit, paying the provider(s), making a profit. At least three profit takers between me and my care at a MINIMUM.

Finally, in economics there is something called the economy of scale. We witness this with the U.S. economy. The bigger you are, the cheaper doing business becomes due to volume and other factors in a non-linear fashion. The U.S., THE pre-eminent capitalist economic power on the planet, is not only NOT providing health care at a per patient cost far below any other economy on the planet, they are doing it more expensively without covering everyone! This is an IMPOSSIBILITY if the system works! But of course it doesn't work. And yet, what is the Republican argument against a single payer system? That's right people....COST. Swallow this crap if you want Mr. Smitek. I suspect you don't ever expect to have to worry about these issues, thus all those "brown" people as you call them can just fend for themselves. When it comes to colours, sir, your true ones are showing with that comment.

Mark Smitek,

First, the truth, even if it is hurtful is not grounds for asking why they are here. I must have hit a nerve. If you were truly so confident in your arguments I doubt we would have heard a peep from you.

Secondly, you must get your numbers from Aryan Quarterly magazine, or perhaps Fox-spews. The OUTSIDE estimate for illegal aliens is 20 million. More likely it is 12. Where do you get 30 million Mexicans alone? I will concede that economically, the U.S. probably provides the single greatest opportunity for an immigrant anywhere. This is why people come here. A SPECTACULARLY small number of them will EVER approach the pinnacle of the opportunity provided them. Do you really think these poor, uneducated people from the third world have a clue how much better it might be to move to say Canada, or Australia, or New Zealand? Even Americans like you who border us are oblivious! You dominate world culture like none other, thus you receive many immigrants. That you can see this as an endorsement of your morally and ethically bankrupt policies is LAUGHABLE!

Finally, why do we need a PM of a visible minority? Look in the parliament. See Sikhs, Muslims, Native Canadians, homosexuals, practically every minority visible and otherwise that you can think of...ELECTED. Then look at the old white men, with a sprinkle of token representation from minorities present in the U.S. congress FOUR DECADES after the civil rights movement. If a Muslim or Sikh even RAN for office in the U.S., let alone won, it would make national headlines. Do you REALLY think we need to feel shame? REALLY? Well, then I guess we can see why you and people like you are part of the problem. Thanks for the lesson.

We've had a woman PM. We regularly have PM's from the largest minority in our country. Can you say the same? We are far from perfect, but we never look so perfect as when we are compared to you. Thanks for pointing that out.

Oboma will win this election even he dont choice H Clinton as his running mate.

If the excessive Hillary supporters destroy this campaign they would single-handedly obliterate the Democratic party.

This election was handed to the Dems on a silver platter and it takes an amazingly high level of ignorance to blow it.

"Roosevelt could speak to crowds in the hollows of West Virginia and they would think he was one of them."
I say:
Obama could speak to crowds in South Carolina,
,Louisiana,Florida,....and they would think he was one of them

I think Obama's positivity will win the day. He has very good ideas such as ending the futile war in Iraq which is bankrupting his country. On the other hand, as you said, "thinking Americans" are not plentiful. Americans elected George W. Bush twice.

Empathy, shmepathy! There are only two reasons that Obama is losing the vote. The first is the effectiveness of corporate controlled mainstream media (MSM) which ensures that no 'third party' candidate ever gets more than a token comment thereby guaranteeing that only corporate selected candidates (McCain and Obama) will be served up come election day.
The second reason Obama is trailing his Republican rival is that too many Americans have come to realize that Obama is embracing a corporate agenda... at the expense of the American public. As usual all things that are anethema to multi-nationals from reducing the military budget or corporate welfare to providing universal healthcare and substantially raising the minimum wage are never mentioned unless framed in the usual vague, rhetorical nonsense.
The long range forcast is more privatization, endless wars, demonization of most of the planet, buckets of fear, skyrocketing healthcare costs, packed prisons and a slew of newly minted millionaires on Wall Street.

Obama's greatest chance right now is that Americans note that McCain has 7 homes and didn't know how many he had currently.

How exactly are McCain tax cuts, which include making permanent the tax cuts of George Bush, going to help America if they haven't the last 8 years? The Urban-Brookings tax policy center analyzed both candidates’ tax policies, and concluded McCain's helps the rich but increases the deficit. Obama has actually stated his policies, and yes, of course, these policies can be scrutinized, and are worthy of being disagreed with. But to say that his only policy is spouting "change" is based on the ignorance of those who are watching a clip of his speech here and there and would rather not listen to all his words. Of course, the biggest problem with Barack Obama is that he is black. Let's not be delusional. If he was white and had blonde hair, and with the current president's approval rating, was starting a rally cry of changing the direction of the country, led by pulling out of an unpopular and unnecessary war, Obama would be up about 15%. All these complaints about Obama are little digs about him being black. Him being an "elitist" really means that he does not meet the stereotypical definition of a black man held by a large percentage, much larger than 10%, of the voting population. These voters are more comfortable with a black man more closely resembling that of a man on the TV show "Cops" as opposed to someone like Obama. The very notion that a man who speaks well, commands respect and is educated is too elite to be president shows how truly dumb American voters have become.

I really can't see how the US public could ever consider voting for a Republican after the mess they have made in the last 10 years. I would think they would be willing to vote for anyone but McCain.

Let the best man for the job win; and, if that man be Obama, so be it. But he won't win this November election. Let's be realistic. Part of the reason why has to do with race. Americans claim to be such a liberal minded nation, having such Christian "holier than now" virtues; but the truth is Americans are the biggest hypocrits on this planet: puritanical in their methods, but not in their manners. If Americans spent less time trying to liberate the non-English world, and more time liberating themselves, we might get somewhere; but America is populated by a lot of Archie Bunkers out there. All Americans seem to care about is spreading their crap culture to the rest of the world, paying little or no regard to other countries. So race has a lot to do with Obama's chances of winning. The second reason Obama might not win the fall election is because of his arrogance. He is not even President, yet he has travelled to Germany, trying to mimic Ronald Reagan, back in 1989, with that "tear down that wall" speech, and desperately trying to ape John F. Kennedy. For a man with relatively no experience, he is behaving as if he's been in politics for ages. Hillary would have standed a better chance of winning. At least John McCain has the scars to prove his battle weariness, having spent five years in a POW camp in south east Asia. If Barack Obama is the best man for the job, then I hope he wins. The truth is, he is NOT the best man for the job. He is quite shallow: all talk and little or no action. Let the man who is best for the job win.

Kelvin Luther...

as an American living in the US I have to ask this sincerely...why are you here in the US if this is truly the way you feel? GO HOME!

I'll tell you the same thing I tell anyone from around the world who does not approve of our health care system...don't come here! Despite our porported "racism" and our "cruel health care system" we seem to be a (several decades) long-term magnet for poor people OF COLOR from around the world...over thirty million (equal to the ENTIRE population of Canada) illegaly here from Mexico ALONE. Why are all of these brown people moving here? To be victims of racism and a heartless health care system? Ever think that most people just want an opportunity to be successful? And the US continues to offer this opportunity in spades. Finally, I must have missed someone but can any Canadian tell me the name of your last PM of color? Thought so - do you have ANY shame?

Obama would have -on one level- been foolish to choose Hilary Clinton. Bill Clinton would still be in the background and in that light, it would have seemed to "dynastic" for a lot of people's liking.

Old man Bush, then Bill Clinton. Younger Bush then Mrs. Clinton.

... a bad idea.

Henry, as some readers stated earlier, there is only one and one reason: race.

An elderly Jewish women in Florida who is a Democrat put it blatantly. In a news report she said and I quote "...I will vote Obama but please, do not say it loudly..." she continues "...they will use this excuse and that around here but the real reason is..." and she points at the black coffee in a cup in front her on the table.

It is race, indeed, and that is why some pretending to be Democrats and so called Hilary Clintons diehard supporter are so vehement in their opposition against him even when there is no more rational for their opposition.

On the other hand, it is only in America that a person like Obama could come at the historic threshold he is now. So America is this amazingly bewildering country that is standing at the cross road of destiny; If they elect the first black, elected universally, president of a western country, they will be truly an exceptional country that is unique in the history of mankind: from the back of the bus and the lynch mob to their highest office; what a people, what a country

Mr. Champ, your article makes the statement that the polls in the swing states show McCain winning. I must be looking at different polls. Go to Dave Leip's atlas of U.S. elections on the web. Go to the general election polls site. He averages the last three polls for each state and categorizes them. Obama is 6 electoral votes shy in states going his way, and there are a number (including Alaska, Montana, Virginia) significantly trending his way and most of the rest of the toss-ups are competitive for him, or threatening to trend his way. It is hardly a landslide, but if you look at McCain in these polls, he has a long way to go. Thus, I wonder where you get the statement that McCain wins if the election is held today? I'm highly skeptical of the quality of journalism in this article. And we aren't even considering the outside possibility that those cell-phone using kids might actually show up at the polls. Not something I would want to count on, but with things trending his way, any youth vote above the average turnout would seem to be a little gravy on top to consider. All McCain can hope for is that Bush will secretly promise to back suicidal war mongering by a few more former Soviet satellites creating additional Russian over-reactions to distract people from voting in their self interest.

Or did all of you miss the obvious implications at the beginning of the Georgia conflict that American backing was expected by the Georgians? They CLEARLY expected it. Must have been a miscommunication somewhere. W would NEVER do something so sleazy. I mean, letting an ally start a war for his political gain, that would be akin to baiting bigots to the polls with anti-gay marriage amendments on the ballot. Or spreading rumours in a racist state like South Carolina that the adopted Bangladeshi child of your opponent was actually a love-child. A Christian pillar integrity like Bush wouldn't do that!

Have you seen the latest polls, McCain is in the lead by 5 points. So its going to be a close race.

I would like to refer readers to my other comment about giving racists an excuse, and then ask you to read the comment from Mr. William Westcott of Barrie to see it in action. I'm sure he thinks he has no bias based on skin colour at all.

Mr. Westcott, Bush has bankrupted the country to enrich Haliburton and the Oil companies. He has had NO energy policy, and he has given tax cuts to the rich creating the biggest deficits in history, which WILL be payed back by the middle class. They ALWAYS are. McCain is running an IDENTICAL agenda. Obama's tax plan has been laid out in gory detail for those who aren't functional illiterates, giving tax BREAKS to the middle class and poor and making up the difference taxing people making more than $250,000/yr. If someone making that kind of money will be driven to hardship by increased taxes, then they deserve it because CLEARLY they have been living above their not insubstantial means. Hardly the most sympathetic sob story any "thinking" person has ever heard.

Putting money into the pockets of people who spend every dollar they get on goods and services means you get a minimum of 1 dollar of economic stimulus for every dollar spent. Putting that same dollar into the pockets of some con-artist shyster corporate hack with more money than he can already spend creates what? If your lucky, 5 cents on the dollar worth of stimulus? And don't argue supply side crap. If it worked, real wages would have grown since 1970, and the recent, record growth in wealth would not have been the first to ever see a LOSS of jobs. The only thing empty is the heads of people like you and the senile lunatic running for the GOP who can't remember how many homes he has and thinks you need $5,000,000 before you can be considered rich.

Four years of hamfisted leftist do-goodery, big government social welfare programs, new taxes and affirmative action on steriods would still be preferable to the all the war, all the time inclinations of the little man with the big jaw. If McCain and those of his ilk has their way, we'd all be on the brink of another Cuban missile crisis over Georgia. Obama is the better of two not-very-good choices. At least there wouldn't be another war in the Middle East.

Maybe...

All Fluff and no substance is what this white guy in brown skin is all about. People are starting to see through his rock star image and realizing he hasn't got much to lead them through in such difficult times, but a few warm and fuzzy speeches!

As an expat in the U.S. I can tell you all with ABSOLUTE certainty that there is one reason and one reason only. Race. Unfortunately no one wants to talk about it. All of the noise about how radically left he is, how inexperienced, being an elitist is all garbage designed to allow bigots to vote against him based on race but not have to admit this was the reason either to themselves or anyone else. This country is spectacularly bad at examining its own flaws, and this is just one more example where every "thinking" person must see what is happening, but no one is dealing with the problem. Don't kid yourselves, the U.S. is the most un-Christian country in the world yet they consider themselves paragons of Christian virtue. There is no way to fight that kind of delusion. We can only hope that the Re-puke-lican brand is so damaged that Obama squeaks through. By the way, the national polls mean absolutely nothing. Averages of state polls seem to indicate Obama could win quite handily so it is very hard to judge the true nature of the race (which won't stop the talking heads from pontificating at length).

..."a diner in the morning, a hoagie in the afternoon and a bar at night."...

It is quite interesting that while calling for change in every his speech Obama managed not to tell a word of what kind of change he is talking about. And, amazingly, nobody seems concerned about this. The only things that are missing are...."a dinner....a hoagie....a bar..."

Let me remind you what happened during the last provincial elections in Ontario. As long as Conservatives were talking about need for change in provincial educational system, everybody agreed. But when John Tory came up with an idea that the fix is going to be provincial funding of all faith based schools, few agreed. As a result, Conservatives are minority in Provincial Legislature and J.Tory himself is not MPP at all. Of course, Americans are much less rational than we are but at least some basic stuff they should get from both candidates before they go to polls, not just "dinners...and bars.."

Double whammy for Obama!

Now that Obama has not chosen Hillary for his ticket two factors would negatively impact his election to Presidency:

The first one has nothing to do with Hillary but has to do with the fact that over 10% of Americans are still not ready to vote for a black man.

The second one has everything to do with Hillary. There is a good percentage of the population that is very angry that Hillary had lost the primaries. These people even think that the primaries victory was stolen from her. They might have voted for Obama if he had chosen Hillary for his ticket. But now they will most probably not vote for him.

I think Obama just made the biggest mistake of his life by not choosing Hillary.

This author, like many pundits before him, ignores the real reasons Obama is not "clicking" with ordinary Americans. First, he looks different (read black). Second, the mainstream media doesn't report all (or any) of McCain's policy flip flops and verbal gaffes, while it exaggerates any Obama statement or incident that the right-wing spin machine decides to pounce on. Third, the media shields from public view its own biased manipulation of "news" by blaming the Democratic candidates (i.e. victims) Gore, Kerry, and Obama, for being responsible for their own fates.

I'm a Canadian with experience of political drama in both countries. I can tell you that this will be an extremely hard fought and nasty election. Thinking Americans (who may indeed be in the minority, just as thinking Canadians might be in Canadian elections) realize that a Democrat ticket means higher taxes, and a likely hit on the small business sector, which drives the economy. And so called "free trade" seems to be embraced by both parties, just as it was by the traitorous Mulroney in Canada. In order for countries to survive, some sort of protectionism and definition of sovereignty which includes Immigration Reform must be in place. No politician of the day seems to want to address these issues.

Paul

Many journalist plus all of the pollsters have not taken into account the 18-20 million young and first time voters (95%) who are supporting Barack Obama. Things are changing as the new generation is stepping up to the plate, even Henry Champ must agree new electronic messaging and sites such as these are not really used or even read by those old time voters. This may come of a surprise to Henry Champ and others but there is really a large world of news and views outside of Washington and Ottawa! The fact over 200,000 people showed up to see Barack in one of many events was not an accident, show me any politician or newsperson who does not believe such an event is news and I will show people who are in denial. Better still tell these 100's of thousands their time was wasted! History will of course determine the outcome of the US election and the MSM is not fooling we who can read, write, investigate, and are skeptical of electronic voting (with no paper trail) the true facts. To CBC my beloved broadcasting network, I ask you to go above the normal and dig deeper to provide a view of why thousands who are willing to stand and listen to Barack
Obama and only a few hundred are willing to sit to listen to John McCain stumble reading from a teleprompter?

At one rally, a female supporter shouted out, ' Mr. Stevenson, every thinking-American is with you.' To which he replied, ' that's unfortunate, since I need a majority.'

The quotation from Adlai Stevenson is extremely apt.
More than ever, U.S. politics is a race to the bottom.
In the spurious "age of information", elections are lost and won on emotions--and the primal emotion is fear.

If all else fails, Obama might try scaring the pants off American voters. The strategy has worked twice so far this millennium. It can work again.

Not choosing Hillary as his running mate is the mistake Obama could make which could cost him the election and give the White House to the Republicans.

At the same time Hillary may also be the factor which costs Obama the elction handing the election to the republicans. The issue the Deomcrats have to deal with is whether having Hillary on the ticket may cause many swing voters to vote Republican since many swing voters hate Hillary so much that they will vote for the Republicans if Hillary is on the Democratic ticket.

There is another choice for Obama. He can select Kathleen Sebelius, governor of Kansasas his running mate and he might stand a chance of winning. I believe many voters who supported Hillary, particularly female voters, would warm up to Sebelius as Obama's running mate

After reading your column, Mr.Champ, I would hope very much that Mr.Obama chose Senator Hillary Clinton as his running mate.

a lot of Democrats would agree with you...h