Geoffrey Garin: Obama's Small-Town Comments Would Damage Him In General Election -- And Super-Dels Should Consider Them
Updated below.
Hillary chief strategist Geoffrey Garin dramatically raised the stakes in the battle over Barack Obama's comments about small-town America, saying in an interview that they would be "damaging" to him in a general election, could set back the Democratic Party's efforts to reach heartland voters, and should be something that super-delegates consider when deciding whom to support.
"These are the kinds of attitudes that have created a gulf between Democrats and lots of small-town and heartland voters that we've been working very, very hard to bridge," Garin told me today in his first public comments about the flap.
"I saw Senator Obama's comments as a step backward to building those kinds of bridges," Garin continued, saying the following of the impact that the comments could have in a general election:
"They will be damaging. And they could be significantly so...I don't think that the kinds of attitudes that Senator Obama expressed are consistent with Democrats doing what we need to do to win a general election."
In the wide-ranging interview, Garin also:
* Suggested that the comments were "completely fair game" for use in an ad, and an "important topic"
* Said that he would "hope" that the Clinton campaign would point to the comments in their efforts to persuade super-delegates to back her over Obama
* Said that Mark Penn felt "embarrassed" and felt like he'd been "taken to the woodshed," and allowed that Penn "did a dumb thing"
* Said that while Hillary's reputation "isn't going to get any worse," Obama's "isn't going to get any better"
* Said that Obama had implied that working-class people are "small-minded"
"Working class people in all parts of America are frustrated, but they are not small-minded in the way that Senator Obama's comments conveyed," Garin said.
Asked what impact the comments could have in a general election, Garin said: "The people who are most likely to be offended by this are also the most likely to be swing voters in general elections."...
"These comments, and the larger issue of the Obama campaign's inability to connect with these working class voters, is not a little thing. It's a big thing. And it's a big thing that is likely to end up making a big difference in November."
Garin Would "Hope" Clinton camp points to comments in discussions with super-delegates
Asked if the comments were something that Clinton campaign officials would point to in making their case to super-delegates, Garin said:
"I don't know, and that's another part of the shop, but I would hope so. It's an important thing for our party to be thinking about...this is a party that...needs to broaden its appeal beyond urban and suburban places and do much better in the exurban and rural parts of America. So this is a bona fide factor to take into account."
When I suggested that Hillary's denunciation of Obama's comments as "elitist" and "out-of-touch" was overstated, and argued that Obama had merely made the "What's the Matter With Kansas" argument in a clumsy way, Garin said: "To say that people cling to their religion out of economic frustration couldn't be more out of touch."
"The answer to `What's the matter with Kansas' is not that there's something the matter with Kansas," Garin argued. "There's something the matter with Democrats who can't make a connection with voters whose economic interests are closely tied to what the Democratic Party stands for."
I asked Garin why we should assume that Hillary would make this connection, when she's been getting branded as elitist by the GOP for 15 years and would face a similar onslaught in a general election. Garin said:
"On this thing Senator Clinton herself gets it. Because on a certain level it's who she is. She is truly a person whose life is rooted in the middle class and in the middle of America. She has, despite an enormous amount of skepticism, connected with these kinds of voters in New York State and developed a real bond with them. She's worked at it."
Use of comments in ad is "completely fair game"
Asked if Obama's comments would pop up in an ad, Garin said it was too soon to tell, but added: "We'll look at how all of this plays out. I completely think it's fair game, and an important topic."
On electability, I asked Garin why we shouldn't be judging it by looking at general election polls showing Obama performing as well or better than Hillary in key states. Garin conceded that it was a "completely fair question." But he reiterated the Clinton campaign's argument that her ability to grow the Democratic turnout in the big states suggested her potential in the general election.
"Whatever we are seeing today," Garin continued, "Hillary Clinton's reputation isn't going to get any worse. And Barack Obama's isn't going to get any better. And I believe that Hillary Clinton's reputation can get a lot better in the months to come."
Penn is "embarrassed" and "did a dumb thing"
Asked whether he was satisfied with Mark Penn's demotion in lieu of his firing, given the problems Penn had created for Garin's candidate, he said:
"If you don't think Mark Penn is embarrassed and feels like he's been taken to the woodshed, you don't know Mark Penn, and you've probably never been inside a woodshed...He did a dumb thing, he knows he did a dumb thing. His role in the campaign has been changed in a very significant way."
Late Update: A quick clarification: It should be noted that Garin made all of the above comments in response to my questions. The interview was arranged before Obama made his small-town remarks. In other words, Garin didn't seek out the interview in order to hit Obama for the comments -- he didn't come out with guns blazing.
Comments (325)
You know what's potentially damaging to one's GE hopes, dumbass? Being married to (and still employing!) some of the biggest "free" trade whores around. Any campaign that employs Bill "$800kolombia" Clinton and Mark "The Walking Conflict of Interest" Penn doesn't deserve a response on this. I mean, really?
I'd expect this from that two-timing, money-marrying, foulmouthed torture survivor -- but from a fellow Democrat? When are we going to wake up? I need to get some fresh air. Jesus, some people are just the perfect combination of willfull igorance and black-hearted malice.
April 12, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
The second Obama screws up, his operatives are out
trashing Hillary Clinton.
I shudder to think of the spanking the NYT will give
her this week.
Obami f*d up! You're rotten Bitch, Hillary!
April 12, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
How is it "trashing" Hillary for me to decry this sort of "elitist" bullshit from a fellow Democrat. Assuming you're not some McCain patsy, I'll remind you that it was precisely that sort of garbage that tanked one great potential president (Gore) and one likely decent potential president (Kerry).
Shove it. If all you've got are right-wing smears, then maybe it's you who should take a long look in the mirror. Again, assuming you're a bona fide Dem and not just some paid (or, worse yet, gratis) hack.
April 12, 2008 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Supreme Court, in an act of usurption, defeated Al Gore's successful bid for the Presidency of the United States of America.
April 13, 2008 12:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I shudder to see your use of grammar.
I also find it interesting that you edit the word fuck, but leave the word bitch intact.
Other than the inflammatory presentation, what was factually incorrect in the comment above? Because stating the truth (and I think that being lobbying politicians for money is about as close as you can get to legal whoring) is not really trashing.
I think the real trash was dumped on McCain in that comment.
April 12, 2008 5:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Geoff Garin feels your pain.
Geoff Garin knows bitter
Bitter's when you order a porterhouse rare at the Capital Grille and it comes out medium...When you ask for a gibson and get a martini
April 12, 2008 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Jesus, some people are just the perfect combination of willfull igorance and black-hearted malice."
You worded this so perfectly. I like the way you think Joe.
April 12, 2008 10:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you kindly. Just calling it like I (inebriatedly and arguably belatedly) see it, but thanks for the kind words.
April 12, 2008 10:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary says she was "taken aback" by the comments? In truth perhaps taken aback by an opportunity to pounce on a mistaken word or two, but certainly she could not have been 'taken aback' by the substance of what Obama was saying - that working-class voters who don't vote on economic issues avoid it because of a trail of broken promises. She knows and in truth I'm sure agrees with what Obama meant. That's why she can go nowhere but further into the gutter of shamless lying by pretending to be offended by Obama's comment. I am getting so sick of her manipulations!!
April 12, 2008 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, she much prefers Gov. Rendell's explanation, that they are racists.
April 12, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
hehe, indeed. the governor of the state himself can openly talk about rallying racist whites to Hillary's side and that's 'no problem', but Obama says something uncontestably true and Hillary has to get out the 'I'm really concerned' tone of voice again so as to try to fool more people into thinking she is 'regular folk'. and why is Greg Sargent giving this Clinton bootlicker a straight up soapbox on which to spew her propaganda? oh, wait...
April 12, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please try to avoid the knee-jerk jump on Greg - read the post again and you will see he was asking questions.
He does focus on the horse race aspect, and the proximity is mind bending, I am sure. Since none of us are on the conference calls, where else will we hear this stuff?
April 12, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama f*d up. It's Hillary's fault.
April 12, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I smell a new party realignment on the horizon when Senator Obama takes the oval office.
All you bitter Hillary supporters will go Republican because of your ignorant hatred of Obama.
America's true colors are being shown in moments like these.
April 12, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
You don't have to be literate to know what "God Damned America" means.
April 12, 2008 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, to be literate would imply you took the time to look at the context of the remark, you know, literature. Maybe ask George Carlin what 'stuff' is.
April 12, 2008 11:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
We have turned to Satan. Come join us, no hope, no despair. In delicto flagrante.
April 12, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mirabile dictu! !niram
April 12, 2008 10:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
You just don't get it mcdonald928 and that is your problem and obama's because claiming people "cling" to religion, guns, bigotry, and anti-immigration because they are "bitter" and then saying they were true is arrogant, condesending and extremely offensive to millions of people. Stereotyping people as obama has done in this and his "a typical white person" comments shows his ignorance and yours. Hillary grew up in this culture, so yes she was taken "aback" by these comments; you, others, and obama being so shallow minded and dismissive of someones culture and values is ignorant. obama will never be President.
April 13, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
And the reason we should take seriously what a Hillary surrogate says is...?
Yes yes, I'm sure we all see that this is what the Clinton campaign will be telling the super delegates, so I suppose that little tidbit is news. Not that we wouldn't have known it otherwise.
And I'm sure we can guess what the Obama surrogates are telling the super delegates, so perhaps that's why you haven't seen fit to report that as well.
But really, bottom line: Is there a reason why we should believe Obama is an out of touch elitist, while Hillary "my family summered in Scranton" Clinton is not?
Last question: Is there a reason why the Mark Penn comment was a last-paragraph add-on that didn't merit its own headline?
April 12, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I disagree.
Hillary's reputation can get worse. It can always get worse.
And Obama's reputation can get better.
It's over for Hillary.
April 12, 2008 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you guys will be pulling shit out of your ass to smear on her, won't you?
April 12, 2008 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
We don't have to, Hillary, Bill, Penn and now Garin, seem to be doing that just fine--, thank you very much.
April 12, 2008 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is so much B.S. I just can't take it anymore!!
April 12, 2008 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can see why you're bitter. It's because the Voice Of Change you've clung to turned out to be an Empty Suit, and your political donations went down a Black Hole.
Nyah nyah nyah nyah
Barry Obama
Hey hey
GOODBYE!
April 12, 2008 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm guessing that once someone told you that you were funny in order to shut you up, and you've been going around thinking your were a comedian ever since...
April 12, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was hoping to discuss why Elizabeth Edwards prefers Hillary Clinton's health plan.
April 12, 2008 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bad thread for you to be in, then, eh?
April 12, 2008 11:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
**Oh gerbil,
Richard Gere has been looking all over for you. He wants to discuss Tibet. Oh, and your grasp on reality.
April 12, 2008 6:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I feel your anger!
Take a snark break...
A measure of just how irrelevant and out of touch ClintonMcBush have become.....
The same way that Mrs. Bill triangulated America into McSame's 100 years war
The same old bullshit
The same old Greg Sargent..what a weasel
April 12, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Give us the link to your brilliant blog, man. We'll all leave TPM and come over there.
April 12, 2008 10:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
ARRRRRGH!
(sorry.)
April 12, 2008 3:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Her reputation can't get any worse? What a goofy thing to say. The press has YET to touch the 'Peter Paul' trial and that's coming up in the next month or so. We STILL haven't seen the 2007 taxes or the Library donor list. GMAB. Anyone who thinks things can't get worse for the Clintons hasn't been paying attention.
April 12, 2008 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama supporters are once again being forced to say that his remarks are being taken out of context. The problem with that argument is first, they are not being taken out of context. Secondly, there is an emerging pattern. We are getting to glimpse how Obama thinks, and it totally undercuts the "uniter" image he has tried to cultivate. A very conflicted, resentful persona is emerging on issues that touch on race and economic status. And there is no way anyone can reasonably argue that these issues should not be examined by the American public. It is vital that we know the candidates.
April 12, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Getting a glimpse? You might just be arriving but he has written two books and given hundreds of talks that are very open with his thoughts. He is many things, but a mystery he is not.
April 12, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, all talk and no action.
Matthew
http://www.TheProblemWithObama.com
April 12, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
You're joking.
"I want to be President" books are as revealing as resumes.
April 12, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
When you start quoting McCain and Fox news to back up your points, you've lost the Primary.
Sorry. Obama just beat Hillary last night.
April 12, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
well, if that's the metric then he beat her a long, long time ago. what he did yesterday was dig her up, punch her in the face, and then re-bury her.
April 12, 2008 4:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah. I read that premature post. How do you really feel now, SC?
April 12, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I still feel the same.
Actually, Obama beat Hillary a long time ago, it will just take until June for everyone else to realize it.
I mean, how many times have we heard about "the end of Obama."
Hasn't happened yet.
You really think pointing out right-wing tactics to divide us on wedge issues is a campaign killer?!?
April 13, 2008 12:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, it is vital we get to know the candidates. I did know that Hillary would inflict war on innocent foreigners if it would help frame her as right wing enough to satisfy Sean Hannity but I didn't know she would enable racism, xenophobia, and religious bigotryamong Americans. Yes, indeedy, it's been an eye opening campaign.
April 12, 2008 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I disagree. His words were not taken out of context in the sense that they were distorted. Which is why he essentially REPEATED AND EXPANDED on what he was saying before.
Anyone who cannot see the linkage between anti-affirmative action sentiment and anti-immigrant sentiment and anti-gun control sentiment and conspiracy theories about AIDS is missing one big point: all are rooted, in the end, in a combination of distrust of our government and economic insecurity.
In the inner cities, the conspiracy theories on crack and AIDS abound, as does anti-semetic and anti-immigrant sentiments. In the rural areas, the anti-gun control and anti-immigrant sentiments are, likewise, driven by the same kind of disconnect and anger. Do not be surprised if, in the coming days, Obama gives a speech that connects the two communities in just the way that I mentioned.
April 12, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
brob you have no idea what you are talking about, stop trying.
April 13, 2008 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, but we're suppose to ignore Hillary's shit load of lies, right? What's more instructive here?
April 12, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Being FORCED to say his comments were taken out of context? Are you joking me? If you actually read the comments--in context--you'd see that this comment actually REINFORCES his image as a uniter. He was trying to explain the situation faced by working class voters in PA to affluent donors in San Francisco.
Though I understand if the intellect that still supports Sen. Clinton after this campaign is incapable of synthesizing whole paragraphs.
They miss you at Taylor Marsh
April 12, 2008 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
because Obama has once again tried to talk to the American people as adults and Hillary has taken a snippet of his comment without giving, *gasp* the context in which he's saying them.
at is as if we were trying to have a discussion about race, and i say "i can understand why some black people are angry; they've been treated poorly for most of American history and this anger is fed by distrust of the government", and you go out and proclaim "HE SAID BLACK PEOPLE WERE ANGRY; YET ALL THE BLACK PEOPLE I HAVE MET HAVE BEEN WONDERFUL".
this is a pathetic lowering of the kind of discourse we HAVE TO HAVE for the country to get back on the right track. Hillary insists on your typical politician-pandering to make people feel better and hopefully vote for the person telling them they (micro-groups in Hillary's case, undercurrents of nationalism in the case of Bush and Co.) are just great and well off; Obama is telling people the truth even if it might be a bit complicated or uncomfortable. this nomination simply boils down to the fact that we cannot afford the former and MUST have the latter.
April 12, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder. How would you advise him to answer the question: "Senator Obama, do you cling to your religion because you're bitter?"
April 12, 2008 10:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
What an idiot. You know this has NOTHING to do with the comments, which were in no way disrespectful or elitist, and EVERYTHING to do with the transparent and pathetic desperation of a dying campaign.
April 12, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. Enough said.
April 12, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
She's like a rat, and the opportunity to distort and attack Senator Obama is her cheese. I really think she doesn't know any better.
Again she proves that her criticism of Obama is really self-hate. "People don't want a president who looks down on them..." Mrs. $109 million says Obama is elitist!
The nerve of this LADY!
April 12, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course the Clinton campaign thinks this is terrible -- they were going to come up with something Obama did or said or looked at this week that would make him unelectable. For Hillary to win she must destroy Obama, the Dem party, and anything else that gets in her way -- and she is more than happy to do it. "Fun" is the word she used to describe it back in Iowa; she is having "fun".
the only problem is that the whole escapade makes Obama look like the one who understands small town voters and the more she tries to take her $110 million in income and look like a small town advocate the more of inauthentic she appears.
This election was over about two weeks ago; the only thing left was time. It is like Obama has a 24 point lead with 5 minutes left in a football game; make that 4 minutes left. He won already. It'll just take a while for the Clintonites to understand.
April 12, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently Bill Clinton understood what Obama was saying:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYi_qNWdjgw&eurl=http://www.obamaiswinning.com/
April 12, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great post Jay. Thanks. I reposted the Youtube link on Hillary Clinton's blog on her website.
April 12, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is such a non-story. The mock rage from the Clinton camp is really comical. At $109 million and counting, the cry of elitism does not sell. Not when a shrinking minority do not believe a word that comes out of a Clintonian mouth.
Here is (yet another) golden opportunity for Obama to claim the high ground not just for himself, but for the country, whether the country is ready or not. It's really not news. Disenfranchised voters bitter, and dog bites man. Big whoop.
That the MSM has nothing better to do is as treasonous as the torture/warrentless data mining/illegal occupation/DOJ polticization the MSM refuses to cover, and Congress refuses to investigate.
Pax,
M.
April 12, 2008 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I ran afoul of double negatives, there, RE: the shrinking minority, but the point is clear, I think...
April 12, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama should respond to these criticisms with an ad aimed at every Pennsylvanian. The message: My opponents call me elitist, but the truth is I hear you! He could play a portion of his speech where he says he didn't quite say it right, but what he was saying is still true.
To run such an ad would allow him to respond directly to the mischaracterizations of Clinton and McCain while simultaneously repeating his core message to the voters that his bus trip and his many visits to PA's local bars and restaurants and bowling alleys were not in vain...that he has is really listening and will not forget these folks when he becomes President.
This would turn the issue on its head!
April 12, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does Hillary disagree with her husband on this too?
From Bill Clinton's December 15 interview with Charlie Rose:
So I think that the rise of this is sort of crystallized for a lot of people, that I think doubling healthcare premiums has had a lot to do with this -- the further loss of health insurance coverage in America. So there's a lot of economic anxiety.
In the Republican Party, it expresses itself as this sort of very hard line against immigration. In the Democratic Party, it expresses itself in a very hard line against trade. But the real problem is we haven't created enough good new jobs.
http://www.jedreport.com/2008/04/december-2007-b.html
April 12, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course she does. She told him to STFU today, and when reporters asked him about this flap he said "whatever Hillary says." The big dog has been brought to heel. So much for who is going to run the Clinton White House. The simple truth is Obama has no good way to go on this one. Check it out.
What does Obamna say when someone asks him if he clings to his religion because he's bitter?
You fantasy football politicos step up to that one. Be an Obama advisor. Tell him how to answer that question.
April 12, 2008 10:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
He can say, "I don't cling to it because I'm bitter." I really think that some of you folks are as stupid as Hillary thinks you are. He didn't apply what he was saying to every Pennsylvanian down on their luck. Give me a break. It's obvious what he said, and it's intellectually dishonest for you to claim otherwise or post fake, silly questions like yours in hopes in inflaming less informed voters.
April 12, 2008 11:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
No no. He has everywhere to go. The truth sets him free.
April 13, 2008 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Billy;
He already did answer the question: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIxmi3e2Vmo
What I do not get here, is that I know the people who frequent this blog, be they Hillary or Obama supporters, are generally educated and well read.
How have we become so manipulated by campaign talking points that we get caught in meaningless minutia instead of following the main ideas?
That many are HRC supporters is fine-we each have our preferences. But some of the criticism of Obama really does sound like Republican talking points.
That Obama is ten years younger than HRC automatically gives him a decade less life experience. But that is not dispositive-it does not mean that all he has is talk-look up his Illinois as well as US Senate record and you will find plenty of examples about what he has "done." (Both Bobby and JFK were younger than Obama is now-does that mean that HRC would have skewered them for lack of experience too?)
I have a question for HRC supporters who have closely followed her career:
Can you sincerely say that you prefer this current iteration of HRC to the young idealistic first lady of the early 90's? Would that incarnation of Hillary ever attacked someone for being "too idealistic and hopeful?"
I think not.
Obama's ten years less experience is exactly what I like about him. He has not lost his soul yet. He hasn't been around long enough to get corrupted by the system. To wit, if you read enough from those close to Hillary you will find that she voted for the Iraq Resolution to look tough enough to be Commander in Chief. Granted, this is legitimate triangulation.
But I for one prefer youth and idealism coming from someone with intelligence and good judgment than this kind of constant calculation. Now I also admit that many may have the opposite take on this, but that is completely fine.
What I do not understand is, for those of us who are true progressives, how did we come to such rancor between two reasonably progressive candidates. (At least as progressive as 30 years of Right Wing propaganda will allow culturally.)
Anyone who is ready to jump ship and vote for McCain if their candidate looses is handing everything progressives have fought for since Brown v. Board of Education to Anton Scalia on the U.S. Supreme Court. Is that really what you want?
April 14, 2008 8:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let me see if I've got this straight -- her new campaign manager is telling us that Clinton's reputation can't get any worse than it already is, and that's why she should be the nominee? This is an improvement over Penn???
If this is the brain trust that's supposed to get her elected, what kind of yahoos can we expect her to appoint to her Cabinet?
April 12, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
She just lied repeatedly to the whole nation. She lied in the a.m. and she lied in the p.m., smiling at the remembrace of all the details of fire and danger...
That is what's big and damaging for the General!!
They have sooooo very little mud left to throw at him that they are trying to portray him as unelectable for saying that many in America are angry and that unresolved anger is not the best guide in life.
They are really pitiful.
Here I pass along the clip from CNN's view at his comments:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4G8dRMofHNs&e
April 12, 2008 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder how the Mayor of Philadelphia is feeling today. He must have a sinking feeling as he hears his candidate, Hillary, trying to create racial tension in Pennsylvania. How long before many of his supporters turn on him for staying silent in the face of all the Clinton race baiting tactics.
Maybe Hillary can steal the nomination with her Rovian campaign style, but each time she smears Senator Obama, the more she ensures that she will get wiped out in the general election.
Hillary has now turned into such a megalomaniac that she has morphed into a Robert Mugabe in Pantsuits.
April 12, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
There you go. Spin it to race in the Obama tradition. Changing the subject from patriotism to race staved off the Wright disaster for a while -- maybe. Now you're suggesting he should change the subject from his disparaging comments about rural American values to race again? If she were Obama, she'd make a speech saying Obama doesn't understand what goes on in white churches. But she's not Obama. She stuck to the facts. People cling to religion out of faith. Do you realize how close what Obama said comes to "religion is the opium of the masses?"
Can you even remember the time when you dreamed of Obama uniting America? This is going to be 2004 again if Obama is nominated. Talk about energizing the Republican base!
April 12, 2008 10:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right. Religion used to be the opiate of the masses. Now it's tv news.
April 13, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whatever. The fact is, Hillary will say or do anything to turn this race around, including feigning "outrage" at Obama's comment. She knows damn well that she's grasping at straws, but what else can she do?
This is Hillary's last stand. If she doesn't win Pennsylvania by a HUGE margin, she's going to have very little chance of getting the nomination. And this talk about bypassing the voters and appealing to the superdelegates doesn't help her case one bit. If she can't win fair and square, she'll try to convince her insider buddies to override the will of the people. Talk about elitist.
I used to think this extended campaign could be good for the party. But it's become clear that it's nothing but destructive. Hillary's supporters don't like Obama. Obama's supporter don't like Hillary. Some party, huh? Leave it to the Democrats to screw up a sure thing.
April 12, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
it looks to me like Obama supporters are doing
all the attacking.
All day 24/7 attack, attack, attack.
April 12, 2008 8:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Then you need to have your eyes checked. If you're truly seeing only that, I'm concerned about your vision.
April 12, 2008 11:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just went and made a small donation to the Obama campaign.
I think as he fights back on this we'll notice that once again Clinton/McMavericky (thanks Greg!) look ridiculous. Of course stupuds like Jim Acosta (R-CNN) are nearly shitting their pants and wetting themselves as they hop from one feet to the other in sheer happiness that they have something to talk about. No doubt Lanny Davis is running around the halls where SD's live making much of this too. I still think Obama will emerge stronger.
April 12, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
thanks, I just gave contact information to two Indiana friends who asked how to donate to Obama. This is the very least we Obama supporters can do when he is being attacked, so I was pleased to help two new supporters get involved.
April 12, 2008 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I spend money when I'm depressed, too.
April 12, 2008 10:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why did you pick a picture of a guy who looks like a serial killer for your avatar? Been curious about that for a while so thought I'd finally ask.
April 13, 2008 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, Hillary being a pathological liar is what would be damaging to Democrats in the GE if SHE were our nominee.
LOL!
April 12, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
American consumer sentiment hits 26-year low
War Weary PA Looks for Iraq Exit
Yes consider well. Perhaps American's aren't bitter.
Maybe "gloomy" is a better word.
April 12, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
So again we get another Hillary campaign propaganda blast courtesy of Greg. Excellent!
Yea its so dramatic! I've never heard anyone in Clinton's camp claim something will hurt Obama in a general election. I bet Greg can taste what Hillary had for dinner last night.
April 12, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Barry's reputation can get BETTER? Lady you better check the ingredients in your hair dye!
The fact is this: THE MORE PEOPLE GET TO KNOW BARRY OBAMA, THE MORE THEY FIND OUT WHAT NOT TO LIKE.
Thanks to his guns'n'God gaffe, Barry gave people a HUGE reason not to vote for him. Now, they can decide NOT TO VOTE FOR BARRY OBAMA BECAUSE BARRY OBAMA DOESN'T LIKE THEM!
Nah nah nah nah
Barry Obama
Hey hey
GOODBYE!
April 12, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
In the future, if you have a good point in your message, it's a good idea not to write half of it IN BIG HONKING CAPITAL LETTERS LIKE THIS BECAUSE IT MAKES YOU LOOK LIKE YOU'RE RELYING ON THEM GET ANY ATTENTION PERIOD.
April 12, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oops forgot...
Another great Copy & Paste job, Greg!
LOL!
April 12, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't wait for the next thrity-seven minute Obama damage control speech. I wonder if say his own dear grandmother is a bitter woman from a small town.
April 12, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is no damage to control. By he way he already made it today and he did not take it back because what he said we all feel.
April 12, 2008 8:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary chief strategist Geoffrey Garin
Can't tell the players without a scorecard.
I thought he was the pollster. I hope they aren't confused in PENNsylvania Greg
Bitter yes
Confused hell no
April 12, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well how apt: Rodent by name, and Rodent by Nature!.
April 12, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
The media has already accepted Hillary's narrative.
I am beginning to think this is going to be bad.
Few are asking the question, "Is he right?"
Rather, they are saying, "How bad will this be for Obama?"
Objective reporting would phrase the question like so, "Will this help or hurt Obama?"
They are looking at his 'inartful' statement as being an admission that he was wrong.
Hillary is winning this one, despite the fact that Obama is right. The media are her enablers.
April 12, 2008 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
which media? Fox?
CNN skewered both McCain and Hillary last night.
In a panel, all three defended Obama's statements.
But, it doesn't matter what the "media" thinks, the people know the truth: Hillary and McCain are phonies, and Obama is real.
NO politician is perfect, but Obama is as close as they come.
Hell, he's taking on the Clintons and McCain at the same time, and STILL kicking ass!
April 12, 2008 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was just watching CNN. While Cafferty, et al, defended Obama last night, it's clear that they are focusing on this story as a negative one for Obama.
Very few media outlets are discussing the substance or context. They seem to already concluded that this will hurt Obama in Penn, and that it will likely hurt him in Indiana.
They are buying into her narrative. And that's a shame. I certainly hope Obama's campaign can reverse it.
April 12, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, it would be awful to get Clinton's healthcare plan.
Which, along with her economic strategy was deemed powerful, and to the left of Obama's by progressive economist Paul Krugman. Her healthcare plan is the favorite of Elizabeth Edwards. But she's such a shill, right?
I'd rather have a more republican kind of administration.
April 12, 2008 9:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I sure hope her campaign finances are not indicative of how she'd run the country's finances.
April 12, 2008 9:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, I think this is not going to work out to be a big deal. Obama spoke the truth and he really shouldn't've backtracked from it at all. But unfortunately he did and that's made his position worse, momentarily. But I think this won't lose him any votes that he wasn't going to lose already. Same deal as Rev. Wright. Those people who have clicked into his message have got problems with this kind of nonsense, they want to see the end of this kind of nonsense, and they're tired of being soft-soaped by phonies. You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
April 12, 2008 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink