« NYT: Hillary Donors Upset With Campaign's Management | Home | House GOP Video: America Is In Danger Because Of The Dems »
RNC Attacked Obama, Not Hillary, During The Debate
Here's a sign that the Republicans are now under the working assumption that Barack Obama, not Hillary Clinton, will be their opponent this year. Chuck Todd pointed out last night that as of 9:08 p.m., the Republican national Committee had sent out six of the customary press releases attacking the opposition candidates for their debate responses.
The catch: All of them were against Obama. They didn't even hedge their bets by sending out one press release that went after Hillary.
Advertisement
They can do math just like the rest of us
February 22, 2008 9:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
What math das? According to Hillary they are neck and neck, they've both won delegates (so what if he has won well over a hundred more and she doesn't have any prospects of being able to make that up), they've both won states (so what if he has won 26 contests to her 12?), it is a dead heat right? :P
Basically, Hillary needs to drop out now so Obama can get to the business of taking on the Republicans. Her refusing to let go and continuously double teaming Obama with McCain isn't helping the party.
February 22, 2008 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
They are neck and neck only if you include the superdelegate count. If you go by delegates earned just through the primary Obama is ahead at least 150 delegates, a significant lead.
As to superdelegates, the more Obama pulls ahead of Clinton, the more the uncommitted delegates will shift to him, and some committed to Hillary may convert.
All analysts agree that based on current performance in the elections it is virtually impossible for Clinton to establish a clear lead in committed delegates going into the convention. She would have to win something like 58% of the votes overall and so far she is doing in the low to middle 40's.
Unless she sweeps Obama away on Mar. 4, Clinton's best chance of winning the nomination is to try to seat MI/FL which comes with it the risk of tearing the party apart, and the Clinton's losing their political legacy among Democrats. But even if they succeed in doing that, it may still not overcome the kind of lead Obama can generate in the rest of the primary.
Throw on top of that that she is close to broke, a Hillary nomination is a pretty distant prospect right now. The NYT has an article about Hillary's campaign financing and spending and it is a tale of mismanagement and incompetence.
Having said that I respect your wish as a Hillary supporter to find a silver lining in this.
February 22, 2008 9:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
One more time: Obama has yet to win the number of delegates required for nomination. Too bad, so sad.
Whose fault is that Obabots?
So now HRC should throw in the towel to make it easy for your Great Black Hussein? Don't think so!
How come you guys have such a hard time with democracy?
How come you don't want, what, a third of the country to vote?
Are you in that big a hurry to sea Hussein get reamed a new one by the Republicans?
Nothing prevents him from firing back at McCain. Surely Hussein can walk and chew gum at the same time, right?
Well get on with it!
February 22, 2008 9:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, that's rich.
February 22, 2008 9:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Also, can I just say? I'm an Ohio voter and I think you just convinced me to vote for Hillary! What a persuasive argument you make!
February 22, 2008 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
How come you have such a hard time getting your racism in check? Those comments are truly uncalled for - Obama will have a hard enough time against Republicans without Democrats joining in with the "Hussein" stuff - you sound so much like Ann Coulter and it's repulsive. Knock it off.
As far as Michigan and Florida, they knew the rules, they broke them, and they were unseated - that's fair. What's not fair is what HRC is trying to do in the middle of the game - change the rules. And, IMHO, Michigan and Florida aren't going to matter after Texas and Ohio (and possibly Pennsylvania). I don't think HRC should drop out now, but after March 4 it will probably be all but a done deal that Obama is the presumptive Dem candidate and she can choose to bow out gracefully, or she can take the entire party down in flames with her. Hopefully her closing statement last nite was a precursor of what road she'll take. We'll see...
February 22, 2008 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry but his name is as much Hussein as it is Obama.
For such an "authentic leader" he sure does have problems with his identity now doesn't he?
First it was racist to use the words "fairy tale".
Now it is racist to call him by his name?
That is really good!
Oh and let's see, it's OK to talk about his being black when he wants to play the race card but any other usage is off limits?
If you can't see the pitiful nature of the duplicity inherent in Hussein's snake oil well too bad for you.
But Obama no longer gets to play the race card.
Time's up on that one.
February 22, 2008 10:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
Please don't feed the trolls.
February 22, 2008 10:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, if Hussein is as much his name as Obama then let's call HRC "Diane" or "Rodham" - see how ridiculous your argument is? And you didn't use only "Hussein". You used "Great Black Hussein" - that is really over the top. I agree with Cube - knock off the racist stuff (which doesn't do you or your candidate any good, BTW) and debate like an adult, or don't debate at all.
February 22, 2008 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Unlike you weak minded bots I have no problem with you calling HRC Diane or Rodham if you wish. Hell, Mrs. Bill Clinton and Billary are always used here. Not to mention worse.
And tell me, is Barak to be thought of as black or not?
Note I didn't say only black.
But you must admit that Hussein has made a point of claiming that his race will be an advantage in world relations.
So let me see, he is only black overseas?
How dumb is that.
Fairy tale is not a racist term despite what Hussein says.
And it is not racist to copy Hussein in pointing out that he is a black man. I would have thought cafe au lait more accurate but hey who am I to question "I'm not voting for him because he's BLACK!" Oprah?
February 22, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Excuse me, you might want to tuck that in.
Your bigotry is showing...
February 22, 2008 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
"So now HRC should throw in the towel to make it easy for your Great Black Hussein?"
*Douchebag Alert!*
February 22, 2008 10:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
you may think you are a supporter of Hillary, but you are just a racist.
February 22, 2008 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Great Black Hussein" is racist. Shut down the racist crap. If you want to discuss the reasons that Obama is or is not the best candidate for President, then do so. If you don't want to do that, then shut up and let the grown-ups discuss things.
February 22, 2008 10:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think she should stay in as long as she can.
She's giving him softball attacks that he can respond to now, without the viciousness that will come when the gop does it later. this gives his organization practice in responding and ability to hone their arguments, as well as the capability to say later that the gop attacks are all old news. Then they can focus on the new attacks that will come.
Plus the dems are getting good free advertising on policy, which always helps.
Obama is free to go after McCain now, while Hillary keeps insulating him from more-effective and aggressive gop attacks later this year.
February 22, 2008 10:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
Although I'd like the nomination to be settled, I think you're right,... at least, as long as Clinton doesn't return to negative campaigning. This isn't hurting Barack Obama. He can still criticize McCain, though that's not really his style, anyway. He can continue to wage his campaign his own way, which will be just as effective in the general election. And meanwhile, since the contest IS still open, he's getting a lot of publicity.
If Hillary Clinton returns to negative campaigning, that will play into Republican hands. And if she tries the really vile tricks we've seen suggested recently, that could tear the Democratic Party apart. But if she just stays in the race and continues to campaign, that shouldn't hurt our chances this fall, don't you think?
February 22, 2008 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
yeah the Bill comments do hurt, because they play into some subtle racist attitudes. he's been keeping it up on local radio in TX, making comments about how the media would've been all over the "pimp" comment if it were about a black candidate instead. this ties into the gop comments that obama is basically a soft-spoken al sharpton.
on the other hand, it may still be good to get this discussion over now, instead of later. the problem is that bill is doing it under the radar, so it just feeds into the gop narrative for the fall.
I think Hillary's comments don't hurt him in the general though, because she's kept her attacks to things that he can actually respond to.
February 22, 2008 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
Do you think the RNC are shitting their pants now that they realize that McCain is such an awful general election candidate?
8:36 - RNC: Barack Obama seems to think that, oh, wow, that actually makes some sense.
8:48 - RNC: Barack Obama may think he's going to clean up Washington, and frankly, that scares the bejesus out of us.
9:02 - RNC: In his response as to why he should be Commander-in-Chief, Obama actually convinced us.
9:17 - RNC: Seriously, can we join you guys?
9:48 - RNC: Hey, I'm going to go get some pizza. What do you guys like, pepperoni, cheese, what? brb
February 22, 2008 9:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
And according to Rachel Maddow on MSNBC, one of the RNC emails slamming Obama was for a comment Hillary made!
February 22, 2008 9:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Does it mean that they don't think Hillary has a chance to win the nomination? Or does it mean that they want to do whatever they can to make Hillary the winner?
February 22, 2008 9:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
both?
February 22, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
And today, there are two Texas polls showing Obama with a lead. First, ARG (who was closest to being right in Wisconsin):
Obama 48
Clinton 42
MOE +-4
This poll was conducted February 13-14.
Next is the stunning poll from Decision Analyst conducted February 20-21:
Obama 57
Clinton 43
MOE +-3
Confidence Level 90%
The RNC can read and do math.
February 22, 2008 9:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Whaaaaaaaaaaaa? Link, for the love of God, please.
February 22, 2008 9:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
The Decision Analyst poll can be found here. It appears to be a survey of registered voters instead of likely voters, which might explain Obama's wider lead (he has been very good at turning out voters which many pollsters consider unlikely to vote).
The ARG poll can be found here.
February 22, 2008 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
ARG Texas Poll
Decision Analyst Poll
February 22, 2008 11:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hate to break it to you, but ARG are the worst pollers in the world.
They were right on the last day before Wisconsin, but my guess is that they just copied the results from the others. Because their previous 2 polls there had Hillary up by 9 and 7.
The other one seems too stunning to possibly be true.
The simple truth though is that Obama is doing a good job reaching out to Texans right now, so I got hope. Not poll-based hope, real hope.
February 22, 2008 10:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Nobody was right in Wisconsin.
ARG Was the closest, though.
February 22, 2008 11:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hillery keeps telling us that she is the tough seasoned fighter, who can go toe to toe with the Republicans in the Championship fight.
In her semifinal fight Senator Obama has put Hillery on the canvas in each of the last ten rounds.
The GOP fight judges are not stupid.
They can clearly see that Hillery is all Gloves and no Punches.
February 22, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Do you think the RNC are shitting their pants now that they realize that McCain is such an awful general election candidate?"
I think so.
Also the numbers don't look good. Hillary lost Wisconsin but still beat McCain. The Democrats are turning out huge numbers of voters and big money from small donors.
February 22, 2008 9:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
JTHB wrote:
First of all it's OBAMABOTS.
Second, if Hillary had this thing mathematically sewn up, the Clinton camp would certainly be calling for Obama to pack it up.
What's with the great black Hussein remarks.
I take it that you are (were) a Hillary supporter. Do you really think that your racist, ignorant comments are going to sway people to your side?
If you are a McCain supporter, then nevermind. Your hateful comments were expected.
February 22, 2008 9:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama and his droids no longer get to play the race card.
Played out, a done deal.
I know that in Obamaland he's only black when he's ginning up votes by hanging out with homophobic black ministers, when he wants to be black. Any other reference is racist.
Yeah, just like fairy tale.
Sorry, time's up on that bs too.
And Hussein is as much his name as Obama. Not my problem he has a problem with it, runs away from his identity.
Where's the authenticity in that?
February 22, 2008 10:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Come now, JTHB, you are better than this and so is your candidate. Your candidate is a fine public servant, and you do her a disservice to sully her good image by resorting to cheap shots in her defense.
February 22, 2008 10:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
It was not a cheap shot to point out Obama being black when Oprah thought it important to mention the fact right along with those gay bashing black ministers in SC.
But now Obama gets to decide when he can or can't be called black? Like he got to decide that fairy tale is a racist slur?
Really, you are better than that.
And yes Obama has run as hard as he can from his full name.
Well blame his parents, not me.
And bots better get used to it.
Do you really think Obama is going to get away with screaming RACIST when the Republicans remind us that he's 1/3 a Hussein?
February 22, 2008 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama isn't going to say anything--his supporters will. And decent Americans will turn away from GOP racist attacks. And decent Americans are in the majority.
But, then, you won't believe any of that will you? Sad.
February 22, 2008 10:59 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well your issue is with Oprah, not Obama. Why don't you take your anger to Oprah.com message boards and get the hell out of here.
February 22, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
why is it every vocal Clinton supporter remaining on TPM is a classic low brow cretin-troll?
oh, and expect Greg Sargent to pick up the Ben Smith hit piece on Obama sometime today. at least, he will once the Clinton campaign sends him a link.
February 22, 2008 10:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lets face it, it seems as if Obama will be the nominee baring something unforeseen...
Soooo,
i think its time we start talking about running mate...I would like to see an Obama-Biden ticket...Biden will give him that creditability on foreign policy and national security...Plus Macain's adage of being the most experienced on those matters will be blunted a bit. And most importantly, Obama loves JB...
February 22, 2008 10:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. Biden give him added foreign policy cred, and Joe's one liner's on the campaign trail will be a big hit. He can be the best kind of attack dog: one with a sense of humor.
February 22, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Disagree. Biden is too old for a position that is a heart beat away from the Presidency. Let's not get too much of a mismatch going here.
February 22, 2008 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have no strong feelings on the subject, but I am not a great fan of Sen Biden. His partition plan for Iraq seems like a rather bone-head means of ensuring that we will be right back in there in another five years to put an end to the violence and disruption that such an approach would certainly engender.
February 22, 2008 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
let's not forget that the dems are pretty evenly divided if you believe the national polls for the dem nomination... Hotline and Gallup just came out with new polls that show hillary with a slight advantage.
my point to all the obama supporters at TPM is that hillary-bashing may be your sport of choice, but you are driving a wedge in the party.
so, let's assume that obama gets the nomination (since all of you have already done that, it won't be much of a stretch...) half of the democrats still support hillary and most of us will probably vote for obama, but will we do it enthusiastically? will we talk to all of our friends and relatives? will we campaign for him? will we contribute?
do you care? or are you so full of hubris to think that the 20 pct or so of the voting public who have "joined the movement" can do it all by yourselves?
in case you haven't noticed, americans tend to be a bit more individualistic and not really the movement kind... americans root for the underdog and are contrarians... so go ahead and bash hillary, i'm sure it feels good, but just remember if you get too carried away that she might be back in 4 yrs to finish what Obama couldn't.
i'm not root for Obama to lose the GE if he is the nominee, but TPM seems to be filled with rabid partisans for Obama and a lot of Hillary supporters have cleared out as of late. maybe it would do some of you some good to read a few blogs that support Hillary just for some perspective to see why she is still polling neck-and-neck nationally?
February 22, 2008 10:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you, dear Kensdad, for making a valuable and cogent point. You are a credit to your candidate. I have been saying all along to my fellow Obama partisans that our man needs the Clinton supporters in November just as much as he will need his own present partisans. Burning bridges by calumny against a fellow democrat serves no one's interests, least of all Sen Obama's.
February 22, 2008 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
I've never bashed Hillary on this site but I've bashed plenty of Hillary supporters who have openly mocked and derided Obama supporters. Let's be honest. Many Hillary supporters hate Obama and his supporters, they think he's a charlatan, and they blame the wealthy, the latte-sippers, beatnik youths, and African-Americans for thwarting what they believe was a sure nomination and an upcoming HRC presidency. Whatever. Only Obama can make his case to those people as to why they should vote for him. Looking to his supporters for a convincing argument is just as silly as basing my voting preference on Hillary supporters. I think HRC would do well to actively campaign for Obama and try to put to rest the notions that she has been peddling for awhile now - that he is an empty vessel signifying nothing who is too young and weak to lead. It's obviously an unfair caricature of him and the party needs to rally together to dispel that charge.
February 22, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, shut up. There was just as much vitriol coming from the Clinton supporters here until she got her ass thoroughly and releatedly whipped. It's not much fun to keep riding a dead horse.
"maybe it would do some of you some good to read a few blogs that support Hillary just for some perspective to see why she is still polling neck-and-neck nationally?"
So fucking what? She's been beaten by an AVERAGE margin of greater than thirty points since Super Tuesday. In spite of her winning "all the big states," she's way behind in delegates and number of votes cast, even if you include MI and FL totals.
The only reason she polls well nationally is because 50% of the people don't hate her guts. Whenever she got up in front of the people, and they saw her wooden, smug, often nasty camapign persona, they didn't like it. Add to that the most appealing politician in my memory as her opponent, and she was through.
I would've held my nose and voted for Hillary if she won. Vote for McCain, since obviously you believe warmongering is the only way to keep american "strong."
Go suck on your sour grapes somewhere else.
February 22, 2008 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
kensdad, perhaps you weren't around for the endless stream of name-recognition polls last summer and fall? Believe me, the Obama supporters were in the minority amongst the Hillary cheerleaders at that time.
Also, I think Obama and Hillary would have two completely different approaches to the party. Hillary likes the status quo--and I think it is WDC based for the most part. Obama does not and he goes more with the Dean 50-state strategy that is much more local and grassroots.
I'll go with Obama and Dean, if you don't mind. This sort of energy and enthusiasm from large numbers of folk has been missing at the local and state level since the 1960s. And it is what we need to sustain our party. Hillary simply cannot deliver it and is mostly shocked that anyone can.
Just drop the lectures. It's annoying.
February 22, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Every trendline in the March 4th votes is heading Barack's way. By the end of this weekend it is very possible he'll be leading in Texas and by next weekend he might on the verge of taking the lead in Ohio. Don't know if Rhode Island has same day registration or an open primary, but Lincoln Chafee's endorsement will continue the trend of moderate & liberal Republicans (yes, there are still some, atleast in the northeast anyways) and independents crossing over to vote for Barack. Haven't heard anything about Vermont, but i imagine Leahy's endorsement and the Obama campaign's superior ground game will deliver that state for him as well. Couple this with the mounting disarray in HRC's campaign and Baracks's money superiority. Quite frankly, ladies and gentlemen, the fat lady is getting ready to sing
February 22, 2008 10:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Does anybody knows how many delegates would add if Florida and Michigan are added? I think that is kind of a magic number. If after March 4 adding those delegates does not overcome the advantage that Obama has, that becomes a moot point. I know, there is PA, but also there are also a bunch of smaller states (in delegate count) that look very good for Obama (NC, for example). And if Obama is with a significant lead in pledged, the supers should be suicidal to vote against him.
February 22, 2008 10:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you assume that the uncommitted delegates from MI would vote for Obama, he's already ahead of her even if MI and FL are seated.
February 22, 2008 10:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
"half of the democrats still support hillary and most of us will probably vote for obama, but will we do it enthusiastically? will we talk to all of our friends and relatives? will we campaign for him? will we contribute?'
That's a problem for either candidate. I wish there were a good way to bring the party together at the end of this, but VP doesn't look feasible.
I think Hillary's team (eg. Mark Penn) deserves most of the blame for going very negative in a way that created this tension. Everything was fairly lovey dovey early on ("we are all good candidates"). After SC, it blew up.
I think Clinton, if she loses, must make a big effort to tell her ardent supporters that it's okay to support Obama. It would repair some of the damage caused by SC and the negative attacks. I'm not talking a half-hearted Romneyesque endorsement. I mean, she should campaign at some events for him in NY, NJ, and use her email list to push for GOTV in November. That would be gracious and honorable.
February 22, 2008 10:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
The primary race is not over until Hillary concedes and suspends her campaign. You are asking for conciliatory measures way too early in the process.
February 22, 2008 11:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
.... why is she polling neck and neck nationally? Well as we've been told ad nauseum there is no such thing as a national primary do allow me not to pay heed to sumpin largely irrelevant (quick guess, she's still a Clinton and carries name recognition).
You want a substantive reason why? Because no one is willing to analyse the 35 years of experience line and shine a light on it. Are we counting experience at being first lady in that equation? I know we're also counting sitting on corporate boards during the 1980's, not to mention brilliant wisdom gleaned sitting in the Senate the last seven years. She is wicked smaht I will concede that but if Americans are as individualistic as you think why they're willing to uplift another member of the two ruling families BACK to the W.H. doesn't speak well of that trait.
February 22, 2008 10:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
observer2,
i agree and i believe that is exactly what she would do...
it does beg the question, however, about michelle obama's "i would have to think about that" comment...
what was she thinking? both sides of the dem party are going to need each other regardless of who is nominated.
i am just getting a bit sick and tired of the endzone dancing by obama supporters... it's exhausting and demoralizing. is that what they want? it's a good way to take the wind out of obama's sails as he heads into the GE...
February 22, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
kensdad:
I can understand your exasperation at the endzone dancing and the gloating. But a couple of points. One, it's just the internet. We are obviously bored people who spend too much time on the internet. Don't take us too seriously. Second of all, can you really blame us? All along, Obama's been cast as a long shot, and even after winning 11 contests in a row, people are claiming that it's a tied race. We're happy for our candidate, we're happy that people in other states are supporting him so enthusiastically, and YES, we want this to be over because the sooner it is over the sooner the Democratic party can start coming together and taking on McCain. It's not out of hatred that people gloat - well, maybe a hatred of Mark Penn's ridiculous spin that ignores half of the country - it's that a year ago very few people would have guessed that Obama could have run such an amazing campaign and actually win the Democratic nomination.
So, forgive the gloating. It's crass but it's human. Once the race is over I'm sure it will stop - together, we all have a long slog until November.
February 22, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
I can sympathize entirely, as can (I am sure) all of my fellow Obama supporters. We were just as tired of it five months ago when folks like Blue Dog, Kefa, Colonpowow and DCShungu were gleefully deriding us in precisely the same terms. I agree that it is unseemly and, to the extent that I have been guilty of indulging in such tackiness myself, I apologize.
February 22, 2008 10:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
The primary is not over. Your requested peace moment will come after Hillary suspends her campaign. Until then, there will be no hand holding, just fierce competition until Hillary admits defeat and concedes.
Deal. With. It.
February 22, 2008 11:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Some trolls don't care if their bigotry is showing folks. No need to clog up these boards fighting them here when you can to theirs and clog up their boards fighting them there.
As for Hillary here's another sign about how bad it is for her. In PA with Ed Rendell holding the filing deadline open for her org another couple of days she still couldn't field a full slate of delegates for the 4/22 primary. She finished with about 10% fewer than a full slate. These people only had to gather 250 signatures each and the excuses for not reaching that threshhold shows just how lacklaster enthusiasm is for her campaign in a state where the governor and the mayor of the Philly are in her corner.
There isn't going to be a miracle comeback. If Hill's performance in last night's debate is any sign I'd say she knows it and is going to bow out gracefully after TX and OH. I hope so. She's a great senator who can help transform our government tremendously. It's gonna take more than just one Democratic president to fix the damage of the last 28 years.
February 22, 2008 10:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
robbymack, there may not be a national primary, but that doesn't mean that approx half of the dems doesn't support Hillary!
obama is winning the primaries as they are set up, but you are ignoring the fact that half of the dems still don't support your guy (at least according to yesterday's gallup poll and today's hotline poll)...
so go ahead and celebrate... you are heading into the GE with half of the dems enthusiastically in your corner! the other half are still dragging their feet.
but maybe if you bash hillary a bit more, we will all come around?
February 22, 2008 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Half of the electorate are not dragging their feet. Many supporters of both candidates have said that they will support either one in the general. And you're intentionally ignoring many of the well-intentioned comments that are responses to your post. Do you see why this is frustrating? You are accusing Obama supporters of all sorts of bad behavior yet you don't give an inch when it comes down to trying to reconcile the position the party is in right now. Not all Obama supporters are Hillary haters. I repeat. Not all Obama supporters are Hillary haters. Not all Hillary supporters are Obama haters. Get over it.
February 22, 2008 11:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
How's this for a ticket?
Obama/Nader
Two losers who make a career of throwing elections to the Republicans.
Maybe they can form their own party!
February 22, 2008 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Classy as ever. How did such a fine candidate as Sen Clinton have such poor luck as to attract one such as yourself to her constituency?
February 22, 2008 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
franklyn I hate to rain on your parade but Biden would be a poor choice for VP. He was a champion of the horrible bankruptcy bill and his biggest foreign
policy idea of the last couple of years was his partition plan for Iraq. When Reid let him have a nonbinding sense of the senate vote on it Iraqis on all sides went nuts denouncing it. Joe Biden as VP is not the way to change Washington.
February 22, 2008 10:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Neither Joe Biden nor Obama will "change" Washington because no one can define what "change" means to them. Obama's platform is almost identical to Hillary's so what else does he think he can do that she can't? All the followers come his election will go back to their normal lives, all the media will turn negative, and the same garbage in the House and Senate will continue as usual. Working across the aisle usually means republicans get their way as has been witnessed so far, even when in the minority, so what exactly will change? The main objective should not be full out to get Obama elected but more a major push on getting a majority in the House and Senate or nothing, absolutely nothing will change and Obama's words will ring hollow because he won't be able to fulfil the hopes he has raised. He can not do this alone unless he plans on running the govt. with executive orders and lots of vetos if the republicans still have a major say in Congress.
February 22, 2008 11:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks, so he needs a +30 to make ANY discussion moot. Very doable, very probable, I would say
February 22, 2008 11:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
you're right cambridge1246. obama's pal deval patrick is already finding out the hard way:
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/02/21/turning_hope_into_action/
February 22, 2008 11:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
That's an interesting link, but I think it's a very different thing for a president to inspire and bring new people into the process than for a guv to do so.
our cynicism may yet get the best of us, but policy proposals are never quite enough. it's hard to think of a successful leader that didn't have enough charisma and persuasiveness to bring their ideas to pass. hillary may possess this too, but her derision of it in recent comments suggests to me that she doesn't value it.
for too long we've relied only on the superiority of our ideas and policies. the generally uninformed will support those policies when they are explained, but are more likely to support the policies of the most compelling leader, who can actually describe those policies in a way that more people believe in them.
I believe that's why Obama has motivated so many. his simple description of how one unknown poor child in one city diminishes our own lives in another, for example, is a powerful way of describing liberal ideas that most other Democratic politicians have not been able to articulate. It will take that kind of compelling narrative before the rest of the country absorbs an understanding of the value of Democratic policies over conservative ones.
(which is, by the way, why I think this will be one of the nastiest general election campaigns this country has ever seen.)
February 22, 2008 12:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
"what was she thinking? both sides of the dem party are going to need each other regardless of who is nominated."
Agreed.
February 22, 2008 11:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kens dad;
For the sake of full disclosure, I am baby boomer lawyer Obama supporter.
I have written several posts requesting that we tone down the rhetoric because we need to unite the moment we have a candidate.
I believe with all my intellect and my heart that we will loose our country for the rest of our lives if we get a Repubs President next time because of what will happen to the Supreme Court.
That being said, I am cutting some slack to Obama's young supporters because I understand their giddiness.
They have never had a candidate to truly cheer about. We Boomers had Bobby and Eugene McCarthy.
I trust that when the dust settles, if Obama is the Nominee people will align, if for no other reason because he will bring people together as he has thus far.
I don't like the rancor-but I think we will overcome it in the end.
February 22, 2008 2:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
drw3344, i hope that you are right, but there is no guarantee. like i said above, going into a GE with half of the dems really fired up and the other half kinda demoralized isn't what anyone should want to see (unless they are a republican.)
i completely agree with you that another republican president could be the end of America as we used to know it (pre-GWB)...
i truly fear that the rancor in the dem party is a danger, especially to Obama who needs a united and enthusiastic party behind him. how do you think Obama's message will play if he can't even unite his own party?
that's why i really dislike the Hillary-bashing on TPM, Kos, etc. Hillary is an accomplished and brilliant woman who has inspired (yes, inspired) a lot of people over the years. to belittle and demean her is antithetical to everything that Obama and democrats stand for...
i've said it before, but if the Obama supporters think that Hillary has run an ugly and/or mean campaign (and they don't realize that it's just politics), then they are in for some really rude surprises in the GE.
all that said, it's not over yet, so a little less hubris and endzone dancing on the part of the Obama supporters and little more respect for their fellow democrat would go a long way toward the party unity that Obama MUST have in November to beat even a scandal-weakened, 71 yr old, warmonger like mccain.
February 22, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
cube3u: sorry i'm annoying you... get. over. it.
billysumday: i didn't mean to ignore your well-intentioned comment on my post but i never suggested that all obama supporters are hillary-haters.
brewmn61: wtf? i never suggested "warmongering is the only way to keep american "strong."" you are a credit to something, i just can't figure out what...
February 22, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink