The Cosmopolitan Blog

In a post back in January, when there were still more than 2 candidates in each party for the US elections, i predicted that if either Hillary or Obama became the party nominee, then the Democrats would loose the general election and the next president would be a republican.

I still stand by this statement. See, I always asked the question “is the US more sexist or racist”. We think this question no longer applies, since 1/2 of america is voting for a black man and the other 1/2 for a woman and one would think the answer is that it’s pretty much equal. But that’s not true, it still very much applies: now that we know our opponent is McCain, who is more electable and likely to win against him, a woman or a black man? So again, I ask the question “is the US more sexist or more racist”?

I personally always thought America was more ready to elect a woman than a black man. After all, this is a country where there a still TWO schools that have some sort of racial segregation.

My personal viewpoint is that, by nature, the Democrats are more likely to accept a minority lead them. So they are more likely to accept a black man. But when it comes to the elections, we may also be looking at a whole bunch of republicans and undecided, who DON’T want to vote for McCain. Will they vote for Barack? I don’t think they will. And in that case, I feel that maybe Clinton should be McCain’s opponent, I think that a republican is more likely to vote for a woman than a black man.

This is absolutely 100% my opinion and understanding of this country from what i hear, what i observe, having lived there and having most of my friends and family still living there. Now, i want to hear what you think. Feel free to post a comment or two. Or answer the poll question on the right. Is the US more sexist or more racist?

So, let’s assume, for a second, that Barak Obama becomes the democratic nominee for the US presidency. It’s pretty clear that’s he’s nearly there, so it’s a safe assumption. But now, the question is, who will be his running mate? The thing is, I believe this is a question he should address soon, because if he plays his cards right, his running mate could have a really great following that he would then benefit from.

So. His choices. Well, Hillary would be one. That would be the perfect ticket, right? The thing is, i strongly believe that their policies are actually very different (some even say Hillary is closer on her policy to McCain is certain ways), so i don’t see how they could see such a partnership, it would confuse the message, i mean, they would then have to decide, well, which policy on healthcare, which policy on environment do we pick?

Option 2: John Edwards. He just endorsed Obama, so it would be a safe assumption. He would bring the white male vote (and young female vote) to the ticket, that could be useful. Problem is, i think he’s pretty much said, he wouldn’t want to be on a ticket as VP again, he’s been there, done that. (Having said that, he also said he wasn’t ready to endorse anyone, 24 hours before he endorsed Obama).

So, yesterday, around our weekly family dinner table, this idea came up, and i think it’s a very viable one. What about Nancy Pelosi for vice-president? It’s like combining the above 2 options. She has policies that are close to those of Obama and John Edwards, AND she’s a white woman, so she could potentially appease all those Hillary supporters who will feel snubbed, and who are, apparently, considering voting for McCain if Hillary’s not an option. I think Nancy Pelosi, as the speaker of the house (3rd highest position after President and VP) brings experience, contacts, and more than that, her personality is a lot better fit, i believe. Hillary, i’ve always found, has a self-centeredness and selfishness about her, she is power hungry and can be ruthless. Nancy does give that impression, and if i can allow myself to be an idealist for a second, she makes me believe that she would have the health of the country in mind with everything she does.