The Seismic Shift (Mary Lyon)

by Mary Lyon, From The Left -- World News Trust

Jan. 9, 2008 -- New Hampshire rocked our world this week. It sent shockwaves through the Democratic Party and through those who read tea leaves and entrails for a living. No one expected the night to belong to the wife of the 1992 "Comeback Kid," becoming a "Comeback Kid" in her own right. This was no mere aftershock to Iowa night a week ago, when Barack Obama put never-before-dared hopes on the map.

It's a seismic shift.

I recently saw a special on the History Channel, about the formation of the earth, and one episode in particular about a dreadful planet-wide ice age. The freeze began to creep toward the equator from both poles until all you saw was this cold, white, frozen orb of death. Only the smallest and hardiest bacteria and simplest life forms could survive, locked in under that tomb-like mass of ice. And then at some point, perhaps the sheer weight of those oppressive glaciers triggered something deep down under the earth's crust. Suddenly, hot volcanic action was erupting from deep within. Cracks began to form in the thick ice shell, with fire and magma spewing up, forcing its way to the surface, breaking through the cold lock-down, melting and splintering and shattering. Soon it was all about heat and energy. Somehow I feel that we're seeing that same volcanic metaphor playing out now. At first, I saw it as an explosive break through a funereal freeze of the Dark Side where the change for which we yearn meant a decisive liberation from the deathly choke-hold of Bush/Cheney.

I still think that's an apt metaphor.

But perhaps it also reflects, to some extent, what's happened with, and then for, Hillary Clinton. Maybe the voters (at least in New Hampshire) have a stronger sense of fair play than they're given credit for.
Perhaps they think Clinton ought to be cut a little slack. Anyone on any side would have to conceed that no one has been kicked around more.

more

http://www.worldnewstrust.com/commentary/the-seismic-shift-mary-lyon.html

thank you for linking to it.

Mary's great. : )

A pleasure to link back up with you!

:thumbsup:

:toast:

It's excellent! We should be very proud of all of our candidates, and quit trashing the ones that are not our first choice.

Hillary is not my first choice, but I'm proud that our party and NH have put a woman on top, and I'm equally proud that our party and Iowa put an African American on top.

Recommended.

It's really what some might call an embarrassment of riches - ANY of these people would be great, and LIGHTYEARS better than the men on the other side.

I was emailing back and forth with a woman friend last night and we both agreed: neither one of us had a solid preference. We liked 'em all. We still do. But as women, we just both got this great feeling, independently, to see our first potential standard-bearer who's, well, really OURS. The gender barrier has been as big a blockade as the racial barrier has been. Remember what John Lennon even sang in that song of his - about women being the "'n-word' of the world." It's time just damned well to GET OVER IT, in BOTH cases. I would have been happy with either an Obama win, or a Clinton win, or an Edwards win. But knowing that a woman is in the game (back in the game in this case, since so many people were already writing her off), and as much of an actual, viable contender as any of the men, is really a satisfying feeling. Really satisfying! Much moreso than I expected.

You could do worse than having your candidates stand for hope and fairness.

The GOP stands for exclusion and fear, for example.

Besides fear, smear, and jeer? AND exclusion.

...so now she squeaks through with a 3% win and she's a "comeback kid"...?

I don't think so...

on her political epitaph. Heck, even I thought she was in big trouble, looking at the dramatic poll number shifts after Iowa. And it did put her back in fully-vigorous play. Just look at the coverage today.

If Obama had won flat-out, that might well have been a mortal blow for her campaign. The pundit class would have run with it. It would have been all you heard today. De facto coronation. I'm a big believer in the magic of momentum. It can INDEED move mountains, and move huge blocks of support. You pointed it out most astutely here just now. Look at the swing. She had been up and then Iowa brought this huge, stunning jolt - and it had an impact. And from a big lead, suddenly, she was on the ropes. Evidently it was getting to her, too, what with the little emotional display that got such attention the other day. I pointed out in the piece how severely she was dumped on after Iowa. The headlines in the NY Post and elsewhere were just AWFUL. Might well have driven me straight out to full waterworks, not merely a little choke in the voice.

BTW, I'm watching MSNBC this morning as I'm writing this post, and romney's campaign guy just told Lester Holt that "the polling in Michigan isn't very good." Well, perhaps the polling elsewhere isn't very good - or isn't very SOMETHING. Look what many of us were set up to expect in New Hampshire. I've heard all kinds of other analysis this morning (heard it on Thom Hartmann, also) about the so-called "Tom Bradley effect" as it may apply to Barack Obama. When our L.A. mayor, Tom Bradley, ran for governor, he had good numbers, lots of popularity, and a good reputation for the job he'd done here in Los Angeles. And majorities of people told pollsters they'd be voting for him for governor. Well, guess what? When they actually got to the voting booth, more people pulled the lever for the white guy.

To refer to her as the latest in probably a continuing series of "comeback kids" may be an exaggeration, but not a big one, I think. I think her results last night changed the momentum equation, surprised a lot of people (myself included), and revitalized her campaign.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_primary-194.html

Last poll to have her in double digits was Suffolk before Iowa. Most other polls showed her with a slight lead until Iowa then Obama lead nealry every single poll afterwards. The last poll to have her in double digits before the Suffolk one was ARG in mid Dec.

Heck, even as I write this, they're still going round and round about this - how the polls were all wrong.

It wouldn't be the first time, though...

Pollster on MSNBC now (Chris Cillizza) pointed out that most of the polls in NH "stoppedon on Sunday," and there weren't any updates for that next day or so before the voting. Things can turn on a dime. And if so, no other polls came back and checked yet again. The choking-up episode happened on Monday, after the polls came out. Maybe in part BECAUSE of the polls that had just come out.

All I know is that she was starting to be counted out. And then came last night. And all that talk has now changed.

I think this is a good episode to keep in mind about the overall weirdness of polling and expectations and how political fortunes can change in a few hours.

it was only that her campaign managers failed to see the strength of Obama. Luckily she had many people organized on the ground in NH and her husband managed to pull it off.

Nominated.

:toast:

your message was very well put. I can understand where you're coming from. Nice job! :hi:

Ooops. You got me sooo charged up, mar, I posted twice. B-)

NGU.

(With apologies to Lending Tree...)

Excellent job, Sis.

NNNGU.

Never, Never, NEVER give up!

There was a part of me that's been suspicious, for a little while at least, that maybe a bunch of New Hampshire voters decided to give bogus answers to pollsters - just BECAUSE. Maybe they were pissed off by the media in general (although I can think of reasons of my own to be pissed off at the media for the last 10 - 15 years or so)? I don't know, really. Just guessing, really...