Oddly enough, Angel Moroni had tremendous numbers

In a new WSJ poll, it was revealed that “eight in 10 Americans would be “comfortable” or “enthusiastic” about an African-American or woman running for president.”

That same poll showed that “more Americans express doubts about a candidate who served in Bush’s cabinet (59%) than one who is gay or lesbian (53%).”

So is that, as my friend JackJo asks, a measure of how far gays and lesbians have come, or a measure of how far BushCo has fallen?

Both, I guess. Because although the G&Ls did better BushCo, they are still on a par with the Mormon negatives (53% would have “some reservations” or be “very uncomfortable” about a Mormon seeking the White House”).

Well, first of all, I blame Bill Paxton for the Mormon negatives. Because people tend to personalize questions like this, and when I think of a Mormon president I get a wicked mental picture of Bill and his fugly Mormon baby mommas overrunning the White House and setting back the already tenuous First Lady fashion sense a couple of centuries.

Ugh. And this is them trying to look NICE.

Similarly, I think the African-American/woman numbers are more a measure of Obama/Clinton popularity than anything else.

Obama’s been getting a lot of that “He’s too centrist!” PR lately, which is, of course, exactly what he wants right now. The Dem left accuses him of “triangulating,” or working with the enemy.

Personally, I think it is his job to work with the enemy. And when the final product is worthwhile legislation, then great. That means you are working for me.

When the final product is bad legislation, and an increase in your own personal power, then bad. That means you are Joe Lieberman.

(thanks to JackJo for both links)