McSame is the candidate of choice for those that control the media, the banks, the corporations, etc. The deal was sealed long ago, and the McHug confirmed the deal. Even the way his candidacy was determined, such a controlled ascendancy, with the ups and downs...just enough to be believable to those not paying any attention to the distant past, the recent past, or for that matter, any past beyond the immediate moment.
Clinton is the opposition candidate of choice. She will not win, even if every Dem on the planet voted for her (recall that we still do not have open transparent elections, and voting equipment with results that can be verified), and her loss will be rationalized as her having too many voters who just didn't like her, the disarray of the Democratic Party from the primary battles, and people coming to their senses that McSame is the better choice of the two. Would the rationalizations be true...no, but they will work for those that don't pay attention, and we will have another stolen election.
Obama is more of a threat. He has the potential of rallying and unifying the masses because of his oratory skills and his message of hope for the future, and that is not a good thing for those that control the strings. But, like you said, it can only be done with an election like no other.
What stands a chance is an election unlike any other. The Obama supporters across the country, and democrats who would have preferred some other candidate, MUST create a peaceful "new American revolution". We need activism. No name-calling, no vitriol, not another 1968 convention. We need people singing "We Shall Overcome" and the like. We need a Woodstock, we need a Poor People's March, we need large enough groups of people - middle aged white people with short hair, alongside neo-hippies, and hispanics, blacks, factory workers, farmers, you name it, to get out and demonstrate. I mean crowds where it is impossible to estimate accurately. We need a theme of "We The People" want our country back!
Would the election be tampered with by the same tricks that would be done against Clinton? Hell, yes, but "the Rovian math" could be wrong, just like it was in so many instances in the midterm elections. And if you have the masses rallying behind a candidate, the math just won't work in a believable fashion.
I read this piece yesterday, and it is relevant to the discussion of how election shenanigans can and may have already come into play. I post the link to support my position that Clinton is the candidate of choice, yours and mine that the disarray of the Dem Party is a goal, and how this election is ours to lose.
Now it will get really ugly and whoever emerges as the nominee will have been undermined enough--so the story will go, anyway--to manage to 'lose' to McCain; i.e., either Clinton or Obama will have accumulated plenty of plausible defeatability. And the story of Democratic 'civil war' (as the MSM is already gleefully framing it) and disarray may even be good enough to 'explain' how they failed to capitalize on the enormous structural and dynamic advantages they hold on the Congressional side, setting the stage for currently unimaginable Republican gains in Congress in November.
http://www.electiondefensealliance.org/bla... This election is ours to lose, and we will, unless we work our tails off spreading the word of the "New American Revolution", stop the division within the Party, and scream at the top of our We the People lungs...
