« SurveyUSA: Hillary Leads By Nine Points In Indiana | Home | Hillary's Chief Strategist On Wright: It's Time To "Move On" »
Poll: Hillary Gaining Ground In North Carolina
The new survey of North Carolina by Public Policy Polling (D) shows Barack Obama ahead for next Tuesday's primary -- but his lead has significantly decreased in a contest where the expectations game demands he win big.
The numbers, compared to a week ago:
Obama 51% (-6)
Clinton 39% (+7)
Hillary Clinton is hoping to make a it a close contest here, in order to demonstrate that she can compete on Obama's favorable turf and thus make her case stick that he is politically weak.
Advertisement















Look at the last three headlines.
Did we awaken a sleeping giant this weekend?
Note to self: Go easier on Election Central in the future, because man, it's posting polls for Hill day today.
(Gallup has Obama back in the lead.)
April 28, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
it's posting polls for Hill day today
it's always that day on TPM. They do what they can to echo for Hillary.
April 28, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
BREAKING WIND NEWS !
NATIONAL: Jabbering sociowhackjob Rev greases GOP talking points.
TODAYS FORECAST: Increasing platitudes by midday with a chance of CHANGE and HOPE by afternoon.
In Sports: Obama Indiana hoop fest overshadows inability to bowl Gomers IQ. Crowd snores it's aproval.
VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE
NOT YOUR GUILTY CONSCIENCE
April 28, 2008 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
In Pennsylvania a number of people suggested that Hillary was ahead because of racism. I wonder if those same people will say that in N. Carolina Obama is ahead because of racism.
April 28, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Probably not. Instead a different set of people will say that Obama is ahead in NC because of racism.
April 28, 2008 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
If one considers that 30% of DEMS in NC are African American and that 90% or more AAs will vote for Obama, that's not racism. Only "ordinary" whites are racist.
April 28, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
"AA." Its tne new "nigra." Faux politeness by clueless bigoted white people who don't think they are.
April 28, 2008 2:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
sorry NCSteve, this reply was meant for Marginal Player.
I think he/she knows this.
April 28, 2008 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not racist when most blacks vote for Obama because black people have ALWAYS supported white Democratic candidates no matter what. Both Gore & Kerry got 90% black support. Race just isn't an issue for us in this respect.
The difference is that much of Hillary's support comes from whites who have never and would never vote for black person just because he/she is black. Many of these people are voting against Obama because he is black. I know of no black people who are voting for Obama because Clinton is white.
All clear?
April 28, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Word.
AND, Racism:
"..a highly organized system of 'race'-based group privilege that operates at every level of society and is held together by a sophisticated ideology of color/'race' supremacy. "
It has been argued that a racially oppressed culture can discriminate others based on color, but canNOT be racist, because racism requires the control of society's systems. Which whites (and mostly men) still control. So all this 'reverse racism' I hear people sqealing about (esp in response to reverend wright)smaks more of white's fear of black empowerment and inability to aknowledge our racial scars as a country.
IE, hillary is ahead due to racism, Barry (depending on your perspective) can't be.
People can't even write out the word 'African American?'
Check yoself!
April 28, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damn, I was about to change my picture to the elephant guy! Love that deep sea stuff, eh?
April 28, 2008 3:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't thin that much of Hillary' support comes from whites who have never and would never vote for black person just because he/she is black.
I think some, maybe 10%. In the Penn primary, 12% of voters said race mattered.
April 28, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I wonder if those same people will say that in N. Carolina Obama is ahead because of racism."
Hint: Voting for a black candidate because you would like to see a black president *does not equal* voting for a white candidate because you dislike the idea of a black president.
Likewise, voting for a woman candidate because you would like to see a woman president *does not equal* voting for a male candidate because you dislike the idea of etc.
This stuff is not complicated. Stop pretending you don't understand.
April 28, 2008 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
You realize, of course, that twelve points is more than Hillary's margin in OH or PA.
April 28, 2008 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
That, and the margin of her "big win" in Texas, which amounted to tiddlywinks.
April 28, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey now, that's not fair, she lost Texas.
April 28, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Looking at the data in the PPP poll it is under estimating the 18-34 vote, and the AA vote. AA vote will be higher then 30 percent and 18-34 vote will be in the 20's.
April 28, 2008 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
18-29 i mean
April 28, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
No doubt, Hillary is counting on Operation Chaos to make the election close.
April 28, 2008 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think PPP is consistent in over-polling for Obama. See PA where they had Obama winning by 3 right before the election, where she won by 10. That's a 13 point spread. If I were an Obama supporter, I'd be worried.
April 28, 2008 1:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I should check my last posting. I will certainly be an Obama supporter if he's the Dem nominee, but I'm solidly in Hillary's camp in this primary contest. However, either is MUCH better than McCain.
April 28, 2008 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm an Obama supporter.
April 28, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm an Obama supporter ... and?
And TPM deleted the "yawn" I added. Guess it didn't like how I bracketed it; i.e., using the same brackets used for html tags.
April 28, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
PA was PPP's worst performance this election cycle; otherwise, they've done quite while. For NC, I think they re-weighted who they expect to vote (although I haven't checked). Nothing else, even a PA win for Hillary, explains this big of a swing. I expected some tightening from their 25-point projected win for Obama, but not this much. I guess we'll see in a week.
April 28, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
ARG has the Obama lead at 10%, this before the REV Wright's tour and comments at the NPC today.
Washington Post:
Posted at 12:55 PM ET, 04/28/2008
Obama's Pastor Reignites Race Controversy
Speaking before an audience that included Marion Barry, Cornel West, Malik Zulu Shabazz of the New Black Panther Party and Nation of Islam official Jamil Muhammad, Wright praised Louis Farrakhan, defended the view that Zionism is racism, accused the United States of terrorism, repeated his view that the government created the AIDS virus to cause the genocide of racial minorities, stood by other past remarks ("God damn America") and held himself out as a spokesman for the black church in America.
In front of 30 television cameras, Wright's audience cheered him on as the minister mocked the media and, at one point, did a little victory dance on the podium. It seemed as if Wright, jokingly offering himself as Obama's vice president, was actually trying to doom Obama; a member of the head table, American Urban Radio's April Ryan, confirmed that Wright's security was provided by bodyguards from Farrakhan's Nation of Islam.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/roughsketch/?hpid=artslot
April 28, 2008 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't ARG pretty flimsy?
April 28, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
A week before the PA primary they had HRC up by 20. A week before that they had it tied. So yeah, ARG isn't at the top of the reliability list. Maybe that's why RCP lists them with an asterisk.
April 28, 2008 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that's the most shockingly biased summary of Rev. Wright's speech yet. I watched the entire speech, and the only way you can reach those conclusions is if you were trying to be offended.
Just a reminder, each statement in a speech is related to the one that preceded it and the one that followed it. Parsing individual statements breeds intellectual dishonesty.
April 28, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Victory Dance..." ugh, I have to speak up.
It was not a victory dance. He was in the middle of an object lesson on music and how white and black traditions emphasize differnt parts of the beat. He was, in fact, dancing to describe how band musicians at a football game dominated by black players get it done.
"Victory Dance." What a load of crap.
I am watching the MSM try, once again, to go after Rev Wright, and the fire is gone. The truth of his words pile up, and it's no longer any fun for them. Obama leads them kicking and scremaing to tolerence and acceptance.
It remains childish denial to continue to attack this man who is not running for presidenr.
Pax,
M.
April 28, 2008 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Wright praised Louis Farrakhan, defended the view that Zionism is racism, accused the United States of terrorism, repeated his view that the government created the AIDS virus to cause the genocide of racial minorities, stood by other past remarks ("God damn America") and held himself out as a spokesman for the black church in America."
1. Wright's "praise" of Farrakhan was pretty much limited to noting that not many people could get 1 million people on the National Mall.
2. Wright's comments on Zionism were specifically pointing out that he was not talking about Judaism.
3. Wright said about the AIDS virus that he did not think it was impossible for our government to do such horrible things since there was that "little" incident in Tuskegee.
4. Wright limited his statement about "God damn America" to pointing out the biblical reference (Isaiah 61) that he was using at the time.
5. He did not hold himself out as the spokesman for the "black" church. He said that he was there to speak about a conference that was being held about the state of the "black" church in America.
What scares people so much about this man that they have to lie about him? And, what office is he running for?
April 28, 2008 3:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
As the truth of Wrights words pile up, it is becoming increasingly difficult for the MSM to keep a straight face while they attack. They are unequipped to talk about race in any substantive way, so they did the attacks. This week, there is much more substance to discuss, and too much of it contains truth.
But watching Geraldo last night after the Detroit speech...one got the sense a ship had sailed. No more heart in the fight.
So much flailing. What does Sen McCain insire? Geritol? Sen Clinton? Lying to Obliteration?
There will be more spasming in this beast yet before it dies, but its passing is on the agenda.
Pax,
M.
April 28, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is nothing to worry about...
He only got 83% of the black vote with 8% undecided. He will get around 92% of the black vote.
The poll does not take into accounts the new registers, which he will get by at least 60%, based on PA
And not least, the young votes are not included in the poll because they don't have access to cell phones...
April 28, 2008 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
The young don't have access to cell phones? I think you mean land-lines. It may explain some slight variance in the poll, but I doubt that much.
April 28, 2008 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heh I don't know anyone who has a land line... not even my grandparents own a land line anymore.
April 28, 2008 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
what will be fun to see is all the headlines of obama being the comback kid, who, when his backs against the wall, pulls out a big victory! right? but instead the reporting will probably be like.. eh..12pt victory? thats all he could do? he cant seem to close this out...
April 28, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
No doubt that's how they'll spin it. The claims that the media is pro-Obama are laughable.
I don't agree with my fellow Obamanauts that they just want the horse race to cover, however. I think there is something much more insidious going on here. Not racsim, but a real desire to destroy any candidate that threatens to upset the status quo. See also Dean, Howard crica 2004.
April 28, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sitting right next to you in that boat.
April 28, 2008 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
of course they are and its obvious .
.
make no mistake that tpm and the others(i wont name) more then anything want to be accepted into the main stream so they follow the lead.
and if you are paying attention ever since the attack from ABC the entire message has changed from the media.
it is full out attack mode.
because they know hillary and mccain are bought and paid for.
Obama will change the status quo.
they are trying to stop him.
April 28, 2008 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary looks like she will easily win Indiana and now is closing very fast in North Carolina.
I beleive a lot of this has to do with the limpwristed one being to chicken to debate Hillary now after she thrashed him soundly the last time. With Hillary now easily beating McCain, and Obama and McCain deadlocked, this lack of grit has turned many blue collar voters off Oilbama. How any democrat could vote for Dick Cheney's Big Oil bill is beyond me but the media has to look deeper into Big Oil's involvement in Obama's fundraising bonanza.
Hillary's Pennsylvania win last Tuesday has clearly given the New York senator a boost in the national polls, the latest daily tracking survey from Gallup suggests. Clinton and Obama are now dead even at 47 percent among likely Democrats, according the newly released numbers.
Hillary has won the votes, in primaries and caucuses, of 15,112,000 Americans, compared to 14,993,000 for Obama. All this crap about Oilbama leading in delagates is meaningless as unless he gets to 2,025. Hillary is now ahead with the popular vote and Oilbama is sinking like a stone.
April 28, 2008 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I beleive a lot of this has to do with the limpwristed one being to chicken to debate Hillary now after she thrashed him soundly the last time."
Hillary and her supporters and one in the same, nothing but flaccid tough talk that makes everyone within earshot giggle like school girls. Psst, you're losing.
April 28, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Psst - they've already LOST.
April 28, 2008 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now that was funny!
April 28, 2008 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your attempt at a running gag was not funny even the first time.
April 28, 2008 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought the Clinton machine hated math, what's up with all those stupid numbers in your post!? Most of which are wrong by the way.
April 28, 2008 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
The poll having Obama up by 25 was no doubt an outlier, so a poll with a 12 point margin is not that surprising.
April 28, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good lord. Did Jerome Armstrong and Taylor Marsh buy TPM over the weekend?
April 28, 2008 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
No shit.
April 28, 2008 3:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
A recent poll from Rasmussen suggests that the Democrats' problem in November might not be white voters, but black voters. From the internals of today's Rasmussen poll (sub. req.):
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows John McCain attracting 46% of the vote while Barack Obama also earns 46%. In a match-up with Hillary Clinton, it's McCain 47%, Clinton 45%. Among White voters, McCain leads Obama by twelve and Clinton by eleven. Among African-American voters, Obama dominates but Clinton attracts just 59% support.
While both Democrats hold equal numbers among white voters, the big discrepancy comes from black voters. Two caveats should be considered. First, the Rasmussen write-up does not include a similar breakout for Hispanic voters, where Clinton has historically outperformed Obama. Second, this attitude might be reflective more of the heated contest underway than the future preferences of black voters.
This is the REAL news of the day. Obama and Clinton garner the same number of white votes against mcCain. But Clinton only polls 59% of the African American vote. Good Luck With That! THAT is catastrophic!
April 28, 2008 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Calling all Hispanics...
April 28, 2008 1:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
All that matters is delegates. Obama will get all of Hillary's PA gains back, and then some in NC.
Hillary (and her poll-posting pals here at TPM) are getting pretty close to having to move those goalposts into the parking lot.
April 28, 2008 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm guessing that McCain takes a good chunk of the Hispanic vote.
April 28, 2008 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
12 points.....and you all know how poorly high ppp polls for your boy. You all know then it's really close in NC so start sweating lololololololololloo she's coming for your boy. Losing in Indiana. The kitchens getting really hot. Better open a window or somethin. Maybe eat a waffle.
April 28, 2008 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Desperation laughter of course..
April 28, 2008 2:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
If LOL means "laughing out loud," does lololololololololloo mean you've got a wicked-assed stutter?
April 28, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is over.
April 28, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
you're over.
April 28, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why yes it is.
Please to have you aboard.
April 28, 2008 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Welcome to TPM - Totally Polls Memo.
Our new format: Poll results. Nothing but Poll Results.
April 28, 2008 2:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
hillary doesnt love you back, gotalife.
April 28, 2008 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's true. It is over. Obama established a lock on the nomination a month and a half ago.
The rest has just been a (protracted, rather painful) endgame.
See ya on the other side, Gotnolife
April 28, 2008 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I hate to be a geek and all but TPM's poll tracker has Perdue v. Obama for NC governor? Sheesh!!
April 28, 2008 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not worried at all about NC. Obama will win, and win easily.
April 28, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly what Donna Brazile said the night of New Hampshire.
April 28, 2008 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Come on.
No one has done more for North Carolina than Barack Obama.
April 28, 2008 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
This running gag isn't very funny either.
There's only room for one idiotic.
April 28, 2008 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
PPP is dubious to say the least. No one pays them for these "polls", and they are conducting these surveys as self-promotion at best, as sock puppets for who-knows-who at worst.
If you read the blog attached to the PPP web site, you see they are laughable. They undermine any pretense at credibility by taking gratuitous shots at verious campaigns, and describing their results with language such as "I guess" "we think" and "I don't know why our results came out this way."
Unlike other push-button polls such as SurveyUSA, PPP does not explain their methodology.
It would be a mistake to regard PPP "surveys" with any more authority than the "surveys" Lou Dobbs presents on his show every night.
April 28, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
"but his lead has significantly decreased in a contest where the expectations game demands he win big."
Didn't the "expectations game" demand that Hillary win big in PA. Didn't she not? Wasn't it a "big win" anyway in stupid media land?
April 28, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
The expectations game demands he wins big??
Eric, jeez, you got to be kidding me. So now you have moved the goalposts in classic Clinton fashion to say that anything short of a landslide by Obama in NC is a win for Hillary. Neck-snapping spin.
April 28, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
HELLO???? Eric, you might want Obama to be the underdog but as per your poll tracker on the side of the page??? He is not running against Perdue for NC governor which is how it reads. Can you please fix that because it is about to make my geeky head explode. Sheesh, I hate numbers that are written down wrong! Grr..
April 28, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Please note the inconsistency in this and the previous post.
This one: Hillary Gaining Ground in North Carolina
Previous one: Hillary Leads by Nine Points in Indiana
Or maybe I should call it a consistency, just not a logical one.
April 28, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
I used PPP as proof-positive Obama was going to win PA, Eric.
I ended up eating crow.
April 28, 2008 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
10% undecided! we know which way they'll break at the end.
April 28, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just took a poll of my co-workers, and Obama won 3-1. This thing is so over.
April 28, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hilarious that TPM's headlines are that Hillary is "holding on" to her lead in Indiana, which is shrinking per the poll cited, while Hillary is "gaining ground" in NC, even though Obama's lead is still substantially outside the margin. Come on, TPM, you're better than that!
April 28, 2008 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
And here's the phony PPP disclaimer:
The surveyโs margin of error is +/- 2.9%. Other factors, such as refusal to be interviewed and weighting, may introduce additional error that is more difficult to quantify.
Refual to be interviewed? Weighting? More difficult to quantify???
If you at all knew what you were doing couldn't you quantify it?
This is a joke.
April 28, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Get some more plates ready......the crows done. Yum Yum.
April 28, 2008 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a Hillary supporter, you would be a connosieur of crow, no doubt.
April 28, 2008 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
It saves time. This way the Hillary campaign doesn't have to prepare its own text.
April 28, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting. The headline for a poll that shows Hillary leading but Obama gaining ground in Indiana is all about Hillary leading; the headline for a poll that shows Obama leading in North Carolina but Hillary gaining ground is all about Hillary gaining ground.
Who writes these headlines? Howard Wolfson?
April 28, 2008 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is TPM out with its preference for Hillary? Or do they pretend not to take sides? I haven't followed the site well enough to know.
If they admit their support, this sort of display is tacky, but expected. It's a whole other ball game if they claim not to have a favorite.
April 28, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
PPP said that Obama was going to win PA too. Twice they said that.
April 28, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Polls, schmolls. Nothing is going to change the fact that when Hillary wakes up on the morning of June 4 she will still be hopelessly behind in pledged delegates. By then she'll have some other ridiculously contrived metric to claim that her two pair beats Obama's full house, but no one is buying it. Anyone who thinks the superdelegates are going to overturn the results of six months of primaries and caucuses is living on another planet.
April 28, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Haha. On June 4, you'd be practically begging the supers to do nominate her, if you want to see a Dem in the WH
April 28, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Um, why? She will have lost the pledged delegate vote. Either one can win, but we picked Obama. Sorry, but that's how it goes.
April 28, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dunno what to say about bias in headlines, but I do know about errors in reporting.........Eric K......please pay attention:
In this post Eric writes, in error:
"The numbers, compared to a week ago:
Obama 51% (-6)
Clinton 39% (+7)"
A week ago the PPP numbers were Clinton 34, Obama 54. So Eric's correction [which I have never seen him do on one of his posts, so don't hold your breath, folks] should be:
"The numbers, compared to a week ago:
Obama 51% [-3]
Clinton 39% [+5]"
So Eric takes a swing of 8 overall points and erroneously makes it into a 13 point swing.
April 28, 2008 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It all comes down to math! Oh, wait, no it doesn't. For math to matter, somebody has to get 2024 delegates and without a giant reversal of super delegates (in either direction) that ain't happening. So it comes down to politics. Who knew?
And Obama has had (fair or not) a constant stream of terrorist sympathizing unpatriotic elitist gaffes. It isn't guilt by association. Its him, his wife, his church, and the people he chooses to surround himself with. Maybe it can all be explained away, then he should have done it 3 weeks ago. He's a rookie and these are rookie mistakes. There's a reason why President is not considered an entry-level position. He may well make a great president some day, but he is too green to win and too green to govern.
April 28, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wright is a dead-end story. The problem is his words have too much truth in them, and as he speaks, more of it piles up, and for you to call him unpatrotic just tells me you have not listened to him speak, nor have you actually heard the words.
Difference is not deficient, for example, is a proud Democratic message, worthy of a party plank.
These are non-issues, unrelated to the presidency, mostly because Rev Wright is not running for president. There is nothing to "explain away." I see why Obama did not throw him under the bus. It would break the bus, for one...Wright is no pussy. He was a marine. I would be EXCEEDINGLY careful with that "unpatriotic" nonsesne.
It seems, therefore, that your argument is based on fear, and, my! Haven't we had enough of that already?
Pax,
M.
April 28, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep.
The way the loser loses is the way the winner wins.
I'm not holding up hope of hearing Obama say "I'm dropping out for the sake of getting a Democrat to the WH".
To swallow one's pride is a hard thing to do.
April 28, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll never understand why you guys hate math so much. Why would the SDs go for Clinton who couldn't convince more voters to give her the nomination? Because of Rev. Wright? Is that the new argument? She said he could win, why won't you take Clinton's word for it? And if that's true (and it is), why would the SDs give the nomination to the candidate with less pledged delegates? So again, it does boil down to the dreaded math, she cannot overtake Obama's lead without blowouts in every remaining primary. If she does it, fine, she gets the nomination. If she doesn't, she loses. Better stop wasting your time here and start calling some folks, your candidate is in deep shit right now.
April 28, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's time to make clear to the DNC that millions of us will write in Obama's name in November if he's not on the ballot. ABC: Anyone But Clinton.
April 28, 2008 3:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post PA primary we see the proud boastful HilLIARy that drives people away and her numbers down.
She just needs to stay in long enough until she implodes.
Stop the BUSH/CLINTON regime!!
April 28, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
You anti-Hillary people just don't know when to STFU.
Get over it already!!! They have a fantastic campaign going and there are enough Hillary supporters to show that this is not Obama's campaign to lose.
Every time you slam her you slam us . . . lifelong democrats.
We cannot win without the other. Please do us a favor and join the John McCain campaign so we can go back to a spirited and respectful campaign between two amazing candidates.
April 28, 2008 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your candidate called for the obliteration of 70 million people by nuke. She disqualifies herslelf as Sen Majority Leader, much less President, without further comment.
I will not be silent, and it is unreasonable for a "life long democrat" to demand such before all the votes are counted.
Pax,
M.
April 28, 2008 4:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, Phipp--my comment was supposed to be a reply to Lalo.
But I have to shudder at your idea that Clinton is an amazing candidate.
April 28, 2008 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
What parallel universe do you live in where Obama would be less electable than Clinton?
April 28, 2008 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Its pathetic how someone can be duped into thinking that Obama is an elitist just because he was called an elitist by an elitist. How do you Hillary supporters let her dictate to you who should be called an elitist without analyzing who the statement came from? Does she not fall into that category moreso than Obama, being that she is leaning on the "Clinton namebrand" as her validation of entitlement to the presidency? Obama, on the other hand, epitomizes the phrase "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" and he is a visual example of the "American Dream."
What HRC meant by calling Obama, albeit subtle, was here is an "Uppity nigger" who makes more and lives a better lifestyle than you poor whites because of affirmative action, trying to tell you that he understands you better than me, a white person and then calls you bitter. Which speaks to the white supremacy ideaology, a belief in Appalachia, prevalent amongst poor whites, that whites are superior to blacks and because of their "whiteness" they have a monopoly on gaining economic power and social dominance that should not under any circumstances be afforded to a "black" man. Hence the remarks of "elitist" being dropped by Hillary Clinton, knowing full well how the application of that word was going to affect her targeted audience. Consequently, 12% of people who voted for her, admittedly used race when deciding on who to vote for, that is directly proportional to the margin of her victory in Pennsylvania, as well as Ohio.
This is the type of race baiting in elections that has permeated our history since the slaves were freed and the black man was given the right to vote,it is also proof positive that Hillary will say and do anything to win, no matter how destructive it is to the party or how damaging it is to race relations. She doesn't care about any of that, to her its par for course.Thoughts in Hillary's mind: "The nerve of Barack Obama to threaten to derail my train of inevitability, doesn't he realize he getting in the way of my presidential entitlement. How dare those white voters in small midwestern and western states try to deny me whats rightfully mine? Not to worry though, I still have one more big state left, and it is chock full of poor whites who will be inspired to register and vote for me once I call Barack an elitist and hopefully it will be effective enough to permeate the minds of poor white voters in North Carolina."
To the poor white voters, vote for the things that affect your daily lives, voting against Barack Obama because he is black is not going to improve your lives. If you have not noticed, the current president is white, so how has that benefitted you thus far.
April 28, 2008 6:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your attempt at a running gag was not funny even the first time.
April 28, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Goddammit, that was meant for fogu2. I checked the box and everything.
This comment system is crap.
April 28, 2008 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink