In November of this year, our country will be deciding on a new president. The Republican candidate and the Democratic candidate will spar incessantly with each other in the several short months leading up to the general election, and one of them will come out President Elect. As of right now, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are neck and neck, with Obama seemingly edging Clinton out with the help of his winsome charisma and feel-good buzz words. Texas and Ohio are looking more and more like last stands for Hillary. On the GOP side, McCain is clearly in the lead at the moment in the race for delegates, but Mike Huckabee vows he won't quit until the bell rings--when one of the two have 1,191 delegates to his name.

At a glance, it wouldn't be too presumptuous to say that John McCain is very likely to win the GOP Presidential nomination (he's already contemplating resigning his senate seat), but if you stop and think about it, the GOP would be committing party suicide to do so. And this has nothing to do with the whole "McCain is a liberal" mantra--this has to do with electability. Electability--the same word that ex-Romney and Thompson supporters use to justify their reluctant vote for McCain. Nearly every McCain supporter I've talked to has used the same reasoning: "We need a Republican in the White House, we can't let the Democrats have control--McCain is the only one left who can beat Hillary." Many Republicans have this mindset that Hillary is the only one they have to worry about beating. Think again.

Not only is Hillary's aura of inevitability gone, but she's even been referred to as the "underdog" and a "comeback kid" (hat tip to Bill Clinton). On the other hand, Obama is such a political rock star that groupies women are fainting at his rallies. Obama has surged from being the democratic alternative who wasn't Hillary to a major contender for the presidency. Republicans cannot ignore him, nor should they. Obama was voted the Most Liberal Senator in 2007 by the National Journal--but who knows very much about his record? Even some Republicans ("Obamacans") have floated toward Obama, many of them very unaware of where he really stands.

It would be folly for the GOP (at all levels: County, State, and National) to ignore Sen. Barack Obama. He is the man to beat in 2008. He's charismatic, optimistic, and full of "change" and "hope"--a clean break from running on the Iraq War.

It would be folly for the GOP to nominate Sen. John McCain. John McCain is running on the Iraq War because he has difficulty winning conservatives on immigration, taxes, and abortion. Whether it's justified or not, whether we should pull out or not, the American people do not want to hear that this war could last for "100 years"--there is so much more that we should base the election of our next president on than just the Iraq War. What about our economy? What about repairing our infrastructure? What about revamping our confusing tax system?

Policies aside, John McCain is older than your average presidential candidate, and he has said he doesn't plan on running for re-election in 2012 if he wins the presidency this year. He has a temper and anger-management problem. Throw McCain against Obama, and McCain doesn't stand a chance against the young, charismatic talker named Barack Obama.

Does any of this shout deja vu to you? Can you say "1996"?

This November, we have a decision to make as a country. The status-quo is up for grabs, and John McCain represents the status-quo that so many Americans are sick of, whether it's good or not. John McCain, as the GOP nominee, would be easily and casually dismissed as Bob Dole '96 all over again, automatically putting a Democrat in the White House.

All I ask is that you think twice before voting for Sen. John McCain. This thing isn't over 'til it's over, and as Governor of Arkansas Mike Huckabee has a much better track record of beating Democrats then Sen. McCain has.

-Cydney

Cross-posted on The Celebrity.