While supposedly supporting Obama -- he's hurting him. Want to bet what his AIM is?

If I'm wrong and he's seriously worried -- then he needs to figure out what Obama supporters figured out long ago -- Obama is Obama. You aren't going to CHANGE him. He will CHANGE you!

Not sure what this really has to do with Hillary, but Rendell really is a smarmy bastard

I have the same problem....well I have been working on it for sometime, so it isnt the "same".

But I would give very long winded answers that also explained in future questions, hints and possible "out of context" meanings that someone can interpret, so I am fully understand.

Only, alot of folks would get lost. :(
I use to say "well you should start listening more" which is valid, but I also needed to cut my answers down. Barack should do so in SOME instances. Maybe morning Press briefings, but past that, he shouldnt change his style.

The repercussions could be much more than your thinking.

to be honest i dont think his comments were all that bad.. hes got a wierd delivery but hes just explaining his concern from a position that believes only soundbites work and are necessary for the public in an over-mediated culture.. he might be right, he might not. but he didnt say anything negative about obama really..his surprise at the polls means he thinks obamas an amazing candidate, and he just feels soundibtes would better let the public know that.

in other news.. i like the mccain banner on the right margin and how the campaign likes to use very old pictures of a young mccain instead of pictures of who wed be voting for.

Hey, Rendell, here is an idea for how we can attack McCain: STOP FUCKING ATTACKING OBAMA AND ATTACK McCAIN INSTEAD.

Let me just write this in on the growing list of things that don't worry me. "Comparisons . . . to . . . Adlai Stevenson."

Okay, so here's the complete list of things I'm not bothered by: "Polls, tracking polls, national polls, Bill Clinton's temper, James Carville, PUMAs, swiftboating 527s, racist voters, October presents from Al Qaeda, and comparisons to Adlai Stevenson."

God. Somebody give me a dose of Ambien. I want to wake up on November 6th.

Observer, I agreed with you. Its now "quick draw McGraw".

then why doesn't rendell go on every fucking channel to defend obama like he did with hillary?

he should stfu or campaign. jesus im sick of these whiny fools.

Not helping.

Mission Accomplished.
You're with us or against us.
Mushroom Cloud.
Freedom Fries.
Stay the course.
The surge is working.
Drill here, drill now.

The point is, Ed, we've had eight long years of being ruled by the soundbite, and it hasn't worked out so well. I realize that it's difficult for some to understand, but some of us are looking forward to having an intellectual in the White House for a change. Go figure.

Since 1992, the Democratic party has lost because it has played the stupid game... Billary played it from 92-2000 and Dubya has played it from 2000-2008... we witnessed the same fools in the Billary camp througout the primary season and now they are talking about voting for McSame... when is this party going to come to grips with the reality of ignorance and embrace intelligence? Carter, Dukasis, Clinton, Gore, & Kerry lost because they played to the ignorant minority of the party....

Okay, joking aside, we've got some decent soundbites -- "more of the same," "just the same old politics." And the one they seem to be leaning toward lately: "we can't afford four more years of this."

I think a new one may be rolled out on Thurs.

We're going through a case of the jitters, but I really believe the next few days are going to help.

I agree with him.

Barack will have to tighten up his responses for the debates especially. He can do it. Being thoughtful and concise aren't mutually exclusive. The net for him is that he'll be perceived as more sure of himself.

Candidates and their styles evolve especially if they want to win.

My brain is addled with too much MSNBC.

So true. I can't watch any of the cable networks anymore. They are taking something that should be enjoyable--perhaps even a little educational--and making it thoroughly annoying with their incessant need to spin the goddamn Infighting storyline.

I would like to see Mayor Hickenlooper start locking up media whores in those cages had made so that viewers can enjoy the Convention.

btw, for anybody who's been moping about McGoo being ahead in that Gallup poll (yawn), I'd direct your attention to the one just below it showing Obama within the margin of error in North Carolina.

Interesting...

There are too many negative vibes on this site.

I think there are several things that need to be accomplished at the convention and some of them are not consistent in tone with a bash-the-crap-out-of-Republicans-all-day-every-day effort. Great fun though it may be to bash the crap out of Republicans, and well deserved, too. But, last night, was the time for Michelle to be re-introduced to the voting public and I think the first day of the convention was probably the best time to do that.

If you can just be patient for one day, I'm pretty sure that Hillary is not going to give McCain and the rethugs the kid glove treatment. I'm pretty sure Bill won't either. Joe Biden? Not bloody likely.

And, Ed Rendell should know better than that. So should Paul Begala. The gloves come off tonight and from here on out. Barack will probably have to walk a tightrope with his speech, but I think he's up to it.

The Dems have plenty of ammo for McCain and I don't think they're going to waste it.

It matters little what Rendell's motives or intentions are with these comments. What counts is that he is right and on this he most certainly is right. And yes, Obama should be 10-15 points ahead at this time. There are many reasons why he isn't. One of them is that his campaign has been assuming the posture of a deer in the headlights for weeks instead of fighting back. Obama's low-key style (which the enemy casts as aloof and out of touch) and his overall manner is actually providing grist for the other side's mill. Yes, it's unfair and untrue, but if Obama doesn't forcefully defend himself he's going to be relegated to the ash heap of history like Dukakis, Gore, Kerry and yes the late, great Adlai Stevenson... of Illinois.

Whatever else he is, Rendell is a seasoned and successful political fighter against Republicans: something Obama has not proved in any way that he is. He has never run against a viable Republican opponent for any office until now. It seems self evident that Obama needs some tutoring on how to win a fight against a Republican given his ineffective and long delayed responses to the smears and lies the McCain people have been heaping on him the past two months.

God willing, the Obama people and the candidate himself will wake up and smell the coffee before it's too late: a la Kerry 2004.

Something to consider.

One of the reasons Obama speaks slowly, thinks out his words, and takes so long to explain himself is, quite simply, he is being held to a higher standard than McGoo and as such, any misstatement has the potential to destroy his campaign.

Everybody put the crackpipes down please.

10-15% ahead? Yeah, right. Obama is a Black man and you guys can sit up here and pretend we've all reached a kumbaya moment but we haven't, not yet anyway. What this means is that Obama has his work cut out for him. No doubt he knows this, but it is increasingly clear that many of his supporters do not

As for Rendel, I call b.s. on his comment. Rather than point out how the nominee of his party has been right about a whole host of issues, Rendel gets his panties in a bunch because he like so many Democrats is afraid of the big bad Republicans.

Barack Obama didn't get where he is today listening to what the likes of Ed Rendel had say about anything.

I am simply amazed at the lack of message discipline among professional Democrats (i.e., Begala, Carville, Rendell, MacAuliffe, etc.). This is not to say they have to praise Obama uniformly, all the time. But the reason they're on TV is not really to offer expert commentary. They're already identified as party hacks, so they should talk up the Democrats at the same time that they talk down the Republicans. Amy Holmes, Lori Sanchez, Alex Castellanos have no problem doing this on the Rebublican side. At this point, I believe Begala and company are pursuing another strategy. Out of loyalty to the Clinton brand (and in the case of Carville and Begala Bill in particular), they are working to damage Obama's campaign to prepare the way for Hillary in 2012. The problem is they're destroying the Democratic Party in the process.

P.S. Someone answer me: why hasn't Hillary released her email list to Obama so he can write her supporters? She should have done this weeks ago.

James Carville is wearing Pumas while at the convention.

http://gawker.com/5042170/james-carvilles-kicks-reveal-party-split

Hillbots realize that if Obama wins in November, Hillary will never be President. She'll be 68 in 2016. 2012 is her last chance.

I'm dubious that there should be a 15-point lead in the polls. It's easy for Generic, Hypothetical Candidate A to do better than Generic, Hypohetical Candidate B. After all, before he actually started running, and thus pissing voters off -- or putting them to sleep -- wasn't Fred Thompson the savior of the Republican party?

That being said, I had hoped Obama's candidacy offered us an opportunity to break free of that ugly Illinois Presidential Candidate as Egghead stereotype (see Stevenson, Adlai; Simon, Paul).

Two years ago, you'd be considered certifiably insane if you suggested that a 48-year-old black man freshman US Senator with a weird non-American-sounding name would compete for (much less win) a major party nomination.

Now everybody wonders why he isn't leading the war-hero white guy by at least 15 points.

oh come on. we've constantly downplayed the rift stuff and pushed back against it. but rendell's comments are clearly newsworthy.

Why did you downplay it? I thought the MSM was overplaying it. It is truly sad if the Clinton's and their allies are willing to risk this election.

Adlai Stevenson last ran for President more than half a century ago. What % of voters have even seen Stevenson speak, let alone were eligible to vote in 1956, let alone were alive in 1956?

Why is Rendell making a riff only the Beltway would get? It's one thing for Pat Buchanan to toss around Stevenson and HHH. But why Rendell?

It's embarassing to what our Party compared to the Republican Party powers and voters circle the wagons around a candidate that they don't even like very much.

You know, Democratic candidates are supposed to be the ones who give thoughtful, detailed responses instead of knee-jerk, black-and-white Bushisms.

Rather than grousing that Obama doesn't speak in soundbites, Rendell should say that it's a complicated world full of complicated questions that can't honestly be answered in catch phrases like "Bring 'em on!"

Instead of bemoaning Obama's detailed answers, Rendell should be praising them and criticizing the McCains and Bushes of the world for their simplistic pandering.

I do believe there's a concerted effort by Clinton supporters to bring down Obama so Hillary can run against McCain in 2012. This ain't part of it, however.

The only people who appreciate Obama's long-winded, nuanced responses to every question are TPMers, Kossacks and the like. These aren't the people he needs to win over in the days ahead. It's the ones shifting to undecided/McCain and few know them better than Ed Rendell. That's all he's dealt with for most of his life in PA politics.

You folks who ignore this shit on some "Obama didn't win the nom listening to folks like Ed Rendell" sound foolish. That was a completely different ballgame. I still can't believe so many TPMers don't understand the stark differences between a nomination run and a general election. For the GE, Obama would be wise to start listening to guys like Ed Rendell. He and the rest of the Pennsylvania Democratic machine are fully behind him and want to help. They are party guys and gals all the way, it's much bigger than the Clintons to them.

The idea that Barack Obama should "dumb-down" to suit Ed Rendel or anybody else is ludicrous. Remember that it was Barack Obama being Barack Obama that electrified the country. His intellect was/is a breath of fresh air after 8 years of GWB, leader of the Western World, who could not, try as he might, string a simple declarative sentence together that made sense on so many occasions that he became the Global Laughingstock.

Barack Obama didn't fall off a fruit-truck and if we wanted another one of those, we'd have nominated Ed Rendel. Barack needs to stay Barack. He is as close to perfect a presidential candidate as he can be. Michelle is the same. America needs both of them. Just as they are.

I'm so fucking tired of stupid Americans like Ed Rendell disparaging intelligence. I guess Republicans aren't the only ones who take pride in being ignorant.