Daily Archives: 6 February, 2008

hillelujah: why hope won’t feed the kids, how Hillary will change the world, and when winning isn’t the point

by Gary

There will soon come a time when I can’t take advantage of the transposable nature of the name ‘Hillary’ and I have to think of serious blogs titles. Until that day, we soldier on…I watched Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton give their ‘bugger, that wasn’t conclusive; back to the buses!’ speeches last night.  I’ve never actually taken the time to listen to Obama make an entire speech before.  This blog is partly inspired by what he said on the night of February 5th 2008 but mostly by the results of Super Tuesday.

We now know that Obama took the most states but that Clinton took the most delegates.  This is due to Obama taking some states with a population less than Birmingham – Idaho, Alaska, North Dakota and so on.  Hillary won the big prizes of California, New York and New Jersey.  I stupidly stayed up until 5 am watching the returns with some other sad bastards.  Labour Students – you can’t beat them, however big the stick…

The projections weren’t anything hugely surprising.  Some places were a bit unpredictable – like Minnesota and Tennessee – but mostly the states were won very closely or by wide margins.  Each candidate clearly has a lot of supporters and a lot of opponents.  They are weirdly spread – almost like bacteria.

But back to this speech. 

It was good.  Inspirational almost.  There was, indeed, soaring rhetoric and possibly even oration at times.  The room was silent, as he reminded usthat we can all get on if we really believe in change.  I was given an invitation to become the future, not the past.

And then I got home and there were still people dying of poverty, a war to end, a planet in need of radical salvation and a lingering memory that I need to be a better person because if I’m not, I’m clearly a Clinton.

Bored.  Really, REALLY, bored.  I’m not stupid and I can see the charm of this halcyon America and idyllic globe but I’m reminded of something my grandad used to say which I shall now recant.

There are bad, bad people in charge of American democracy.  John Boener, the Republican House leader and Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader haven’t died and will still be going to work on 21st January 2009.  They will still believe that government has no responsibility for the poor but should have absolute control of women and that the best way to stop climate chaos is to ask oil companies to find a way in which they can lose money by doing something different.  They’re going nowhere.  And can we change their minds?  No, we can’t!

So, I take comfort in the fact that Obama’s support comes from pokey little places with no people that no Democrat can EVER win in November where as Hillary’s comes from people that will vote for her again in November, in states that need to turn blue to put a Democrat in the White House, like Arkansas and Nevada.  Things can only get better.

So in reference to Mr Geese’s previous blog, I want to challenge the fact that beating McCain should be the target of our campaign.  If the point of running for office is wanting a better future – hope, if you will – then forcing someone with no policies who is unprepared for leadership on the free world does us no favours.  I don’t want some fool having beers in the Oval Officer and ‘bringing people together’ for no useful purpose and no particular reason.  I want someone working late nights and slaving over arguments with opponents to being them round.  I want Hillary.  McCain looks OK now, but its fairly clear that conservatives don’t like him and he can’t escape the fact that he’s knocking death’s door with both hands and his mother’s wrinkly head.  I don’t want an Illinois revoution – just a principled soldier at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.  Is that too much to ask?

The audacity of Hope: only Obama can defeat McCain

by Tom Guise

Last night taught me a little something, I firmly believe that Obama is the only Democrat with the ability to beat McCain.  There is no crime in hope, or optimism.  Indeed politics is better when we have that in abundance.  No one can deny Obama’s oratory brilliance – his speech writers are magnificent at setting a scene of great imagery. Statements like “coast to coast” or “sea to sea” always make you believe in the magnitude of the orator. 

In contrast, Hillary is dull and rehearsed – nay uninspiring.  Her gimmick is to point at people in the crowd and smile as if she’s just been reunited with her long lost sibling – it’s all a bit laughable.  McCain suffers from a similar rhetoric problem.  He actually sounds like a narrator on one of those books-on-tape.  McCain and Clinton both speak of experience and ability to solve problems, but Clinton’s experience won’t wash at all against McCain, she will need to change the entire basis of her campaign so far, and in so doing may lay herself open to the “flip-flop” charge.

As the Republican’s look set to unite around one candidate ahead of the convention, the Democrats must ensure a clean contest is fought (Obama made some painful snipes at the sources of Clinton’s campaign money) in case they further jeapordise the integrity of their party unity. 

What I believe though is that Obama can inspire non-voters to show up, the young to come out in support and the independents to side with him.  He has been doing that time and time again in these primaries, we see his work paying off in the sheer numbers of people voting in Democratic primaries and caucuses compared to their Republican counterparts.  If he can do that effectively in the Autumn then he can surely cripple a Republican who is critically incapable of mobilising the conservative base.

Last night one comrade alluded to me that we should all get a vote in this election, seeing as it has such a vast affect on us all!  I know who I’d vote for.

“Uncomradely Behaviour”

by Brigidjones

This story caught my eye, for three reasons.

 1) Gisela Stewart

 2) The use of the term “uncomradely behaviour”- awesome!! I love the way we members are all vague “colleagues” or “friends” (when Tom Geese is not around), and the moment anyone does anything wrong suddenly we are supposed to be close knit ”comrades” again.

 3) Their giant inflatable ballot box kinda dwarfs the Guild’s big green vote sign.

What makes three thousand people take to the streets?

by Brigidjones

 Because I am not at all bitter about being stuck in my house with an exam in the morning and no one to watch Super Tuesday coverage with, I am going to blog about something entirely un-Super Tuesday related.

 So, yeah, three thousand people. That’s how many council staff flooded Birmingham’s Victoria Square today in protest over the new pay scheme being introduced by Birmingham city council. The issue seems to be a tricky one; while the pay shake-up is designed to bring balance to the gender pay gap by valuing male and female jobs equally (hurrah) allegations abound that it will not in fact achieve that. Also, and highly significantly, many staff are set to lose life-changing amounts (up to twelve grand in some cases).

 The issue has been dogged with controversy, not least the binmen pay deal, which was accepted against union advice. It has also been alleged that the council has long since spent the money set aside to neutralise the pay cuts on other things.

 What has really interested me here is the position of the unions. As the Birmingham Post points out, less than 1/4 of members voted in the strike ballot and the binmen rejected union advice… Still, three thousand people took to the streets today.

 Which is the number needed for a quorate referendum in my own union this week, the Guild of Students. I wonder how this union will fare? Since there is no money at stake here I fear far less well… but I hope I’m wrong.