MyDD :: the BO campaign without irony intended.

the BO campaign without irony intended.

by canadian gal, Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:22:34 PM EST

via mark halperin @ time
http://thepage.time.com/2008/04/17/the-o bama-campaign-without-irony-intended/

see? negatively is a 2-way street! a new kind of politics - yeah right.

From the very same Obama campaign post-debate talking points:
"Continuing the theme of her campaign, Senator Clinton used every single opportunity she had to launch misleading attack after misleading attack against Barack Obama, which is why polls show that most Americans think she's running the most negative campaign and don't believe she's trustworthy."

But on the other hand:

"Barack Obama rejected the politics of division and distraction and spoke about the issues that actually matter in people's lives...."

But on the other, other hand:
"Senator Clinton's false negative attacks on Senator Obama are exactly the kind of say-anything, do-anything politics that the American people are tired of and that have distracted us from solving the problems hardworking families actually face every day."

But on the other, other, other hand:

"Senator Obama wants to end the politics of division and distraction in Washington so we can bring about real change for working Americans."

Tags: time, mark halperin, obama, irony (all tags)

Permalink :: 57 Comments :: Post a Comment

Saying something is negative is negative? (2.00 / 1)

Please elaborate.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:29:23 PM EST

Re: Saying something is negative is negative? (2.00 / 2)

Click the Halperin link. He's documenting that Obama is a hypocrite, and he's right.

I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.

by KnowVox on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:31:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Saying something is negative is negative? (none / 0)

So if Halperin says something, that makes it the case. If so, here is how he grades the debate:

Mark Halperin's overall grades: Obama B+, Clinton B. Read full report cards here.

by labor nrrd on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:34:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Halperin's Been Smoking Something (none / 0)

There's no contradiction there. Saying that someone is attacking you is not the same as attacking someone, if they are in fact attacking you. There's nothing there to cause cognitive dissonance.

Halperin is incapable of complex thought. His entire schtick is based on photoshopping $$$ signs over candidates faces, et cetera.

by Hatch on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:42:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Halperin's Been Smoking Something (none / 0)

Sometimes I can't believe how stupid you can be and still work for a major publication like time. You can either agree or disagree, but it's not "ironic" to say that Hillary Clinton is running a negative campaign.

by Mostly on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:17:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Saying something is negative is negative? (2.00 / 5)

Yes. I can only hope that the mainstream media finally begins to notice what has been obvious to many for so long - that this notion that one campaign is negative and one positive is a myth. A total fabrication. Nothing more.

Just look at how each candidate responded when asked to talk about their qualifications as commander in chief.

Hillary gave examples, because she could. But in one case, she exaggerated. She made an error, and her opponent exploited it.

We shouldn't begrudge Obama for doing so. This is politics, after all.

But what strikes you is just how eager the Obama campaign was to drive us headlong into the ditch of old politics: changing topics from foreign affairs to character destruction.

And why?

Because they had no choice. Because Obama had no experience in foreign affairs or diplomacy to speak of.

So which campaign is negative here?

Obama's campaign has called Hillary a monster, they've told black voters not to vote for her because she "ain't never been called a Nigger" (direct quote from national adviser to Obama campaign), and they've said that she is ruthless and will stop at nothing to win, even if it means destroying the entire party in the process.

Since her victories in TX, OH & RI, the Obama campaign has devoted nearly 100% of its airtime to character destruction. While Hillary has unveiled new plans to rebuild our roads, spark a Green Collar revolution, freeze mortgage rates, and succeed in Iraq, Obama has done nothing but recycle the same old talking points, and engage in the dirty politics of character destruction.

And here, you see the contradiction within the selfsame document. So maybe that was brazen enough to finally get people woken on this.

by bobbank on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:37:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Mistruths are also negatives. (none / 0)

Obama's campaign didn't say that Clinton was a "monster." Sam Power did, thinking that she was off the record, and she lost her campaign position for it. She was off message. I don't blame Clinton for Geraldine Ferraro suggesting that Obama is an Affirmative Action candidate, though I do criticize her for not putting a stop to Gerry sooner.

Obama's campaign didn't make (truthful) remarks about racial epithets used or not used against Clinton, his pastor, performing a sermon, did. His position on the campaign was largely ceremonial to begin with.

Obama is not eager to get into character destruction politics, he's just effective at it when he is pressured into it. He's said all along that he's going easy on Clinton because he needs her intact as a powerful Democrat later because he's all about party building and a powerful congress. No matter how many times Wolfson suggests it, Obama has never gone the Ken Starr route. You'll of course bring up that there was this blogger who talked about the blue dress that one time... but that staffer, too, went off message and was removed.

Since her victories in TX, OH & RI, the Obama campaign has devoted nearly 100% of its airtime to character destruction. While Hillary has unveiled new plans to rebuild our roads, spark a Green Collar revolution, freeze mortgage rates, and succeed in Iraq, Obama has done nothing but recycle the same old talking points, and engage in the dirty politics of character destruction.

The level of cognitive dissonance necessary to even write that paragraph astounds me. 1) Obama won Texas when all was said and done. 2) Obama's stump speeches rarely contain attacks on Clinton except after she spins something egregious at him. 3) Obama might recycle old talking points, but those talking points were about green collar jobs, fixing the environment, getting our soldiers home, fixing the housing crisis, and providing education credits for community service. Your post is entirely misleading.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:37:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Mistruths are also negatives. (2.00 / 1)

Obama's campaign didn't say that Clinton was a "monster." Sam Power did

And she was a National Adviser to the campaign. Thank you for clarifying my point.

Obama's campaign didn't make (truthful) remarks about racial epithets used or not used against Clinton

Wrong again. And Obama was called on this lie on national television, when Tim Russert held for him four pages of the most dirty, racially divisive politics coming out of Obama's campaign in SC at the time his National Adviser, Wright, made these remarks. When confronted with his lie, Obama could only say that he "regrets" pushing the race issue the way that he did.

Perhaps you didn't see that debate.

Obama is not eager to get into character destruction politics, he's just effective at it when he is pressured into it.

I can't take this seriously, sorry.

Obama has never gone the Ken Starr route.

He didn't? Weren't you watching as he demanded tax returns and official schedules, week after week? Weren't you watching and his campaign said time and again that Clinton was "dishonest", "secretive" and "willing to say and do anything to win"? Did you not notice when Barack Obama said personally that Hillary Clinton was not being honest about what she will do if President?

No wonder you like Obama so much. You haven't been paying attention to that campaign he runs. =)

Obama won Texas when all was said and done.

Sorry for the misunderstanding. Let me clarify. As a progressive, I care about popular vote, because a core progressive principle is direct empowerment through one person, one vote.

by bobbank on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 07:40:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Huh? (none / 0)

Sam Power was off message and lost her position. What's your point again?

And Obama was called on this lie on national television, when Tim Russert held for him four pages of the most dirty, racially divisive politics coming out of Obama's campaign in SC at the time his National Adviser, Wright, made these remarks.

I have no idea what you're talking about. I saw the Russert debate, it didn't have anything like that.

Wright was never a key member of his advisory team; his position was largely honorary and limited to faith issues.

Weren't you watching as he demanded tax returns and official schedules, week after week?

Sure. But that's pretty reasonable. The schedules are matters of public record. The tax returns were relevant because she loaned herself $5 million. The public has a right to know where that money came from.

Weren't you watching and his campaign said time and again that Clinton was "dishonest", "secretive" and "willing to say and do anything to win"?

How is that inaccurate? She's all but admitted that she's a liar on Wednesday night, and she has been secretive with a lot of her life, such as the aforementioned tax returns and schedules. She has pounced on the most specious of attack avenues and praised the Republicans over Obama. How is that not doing anything to win?

Did you not notice when Barack Obama said personally that Hillary Clinton was not being honest about what she will do if President?

I believe he was pointing out that her positions do not match what she said she would do previously.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 09:49:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Huh? (none / 0)

"How is that not doing anything to win?"

um - and how is BO also not doing anything to win? for all the reasons that you are addressing in the previous comment - and the accusations that BO and his campaign are stating about HRC, 'dishonesty', etc.

what a load of baloney.

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:11:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I'll tell you what he's not doing. (none / 0)

He's not bringing up Clinton kissing the wife of Yasser Arafat when the PLO was classified as a terrorist organization.

You'd think that would be a handy thing when she's accusing him of ties to a hippy radical movement of pseudo-terrorists.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:46:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Mistruths are also negatives. (none / 0)

lol - that was one of the funniest comments i have read here!

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 08:35:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Saying something is negative is negative? (none / 0)

"Obama's campaign has called Hillary a monster, they've told black voters not to vote for her because she "ain't never been called a Nigger""

Wow. Just wow. There's no way even you believe your own writing.

by Mostly on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:19:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Saying something is negative is negative? (2.00 / 1)

Both of these quotes are ascribed to people that were National Advisers to the campaign at the time they issued them. Please prove me wrong.

You see, I'm not one of these posters that visits from the World of Warcraft forums to try to pwn people or lol @ them. I actually know what I'm talking about, and I don't make claims that aren't fully supported by facts.

So, please, prove me wrong.

Was Samantha Powers a National Adviser to the Obama campaign when she made those statements?

Was Rev. Wright a National Adviser to the Obama campaign when he made those statements?

Instead of insulting me, learn some facts.

by bobbank on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 07:33:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

People do have personal opinions (none / 0)

You can seperate an advisor from a campaign.

Example: Mark Penn advised Columbia in favor of a trade deal that Clinton is against. He did this in his capacity as a lobbyist, not as a Clinton campaign advisor.

Example: Geraldine Ferraro diminished Obama as an Affirmative Action candidate in her capacity as a Fox News pundit, not as a Clinton campaign advisor.

Sam Power thought she was off the record (i.e. not representing the Obama campaign) when she made that remark, which was clearly a personal opinion that was spoken with frustration. Wright was giving a sermon to a church (i.e. by law not representing the campaign) when he made his infamous remarks.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 09:55:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Times are tough for Hillarybloggers. (none / 0)

by dystopianfuturetoday on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:04:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (2.00 / 3)

BO puts out such BS, it make me nauseous. He plays around with these "high road" platitudes, and does the opposite, it looks so self deceiving and childish to me.

by 07rescue on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:29:28 PM EST

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

I literally feel nauseous as well, I'm glad I'm not alone.

Cognitive dissonance is scary, scary stuff.

by Apostle on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:21:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

Please explain to me where it's written that you're not allowed to call a negative attack, um, "a negative attack".

by Mostly on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:06:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (1.40 / 5)

Obama.... bloviating as usual.

I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.

by KnowVox on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:30:17 PM EST

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (2.00 / 1)

PLease give the appropriate response. In the face of the "kitchen sink" strategy a month ago and the debate last night, please give me an example of what Obama should say. It seems to me that the only way for him to avoid criticism like this is to keep his mouth shut and take it. Is that right? Is that what you thought he meant by a new kind of politics? To take anything that anyone says and just absorb it? Please explain.

by AHunch on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:36:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (2.00 / 4)

Maybe it means that pretending to be positive and hopeful while focusing a 24/7 media barrage on character assassination and hopelessness is a wheee bit hypocritical.

But I could be way off-base there.

by bobbank on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:41:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

I don't think being positive and hopeful means letting your opponent say whatever she wishes and give no response.

I would also venture to say that "politics as usual" and "will say anything to win," are pretty meek standards to point to as negative. I mean how fragile can you be? Especiallly for a cnadidate who claims to be able to stand up to anything. This line hardly qualifies.

by AHunch on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:49:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (2.00 / 2)

I never suggested that being positive means turning the other cheek. Those two extremes form a false choice that you have imposed, but there are of course many options in between.

Clearly, for example, you could see that, when faced with the prospect that he would actually have to work for this nomination, Obama had choices that existed in between the extremes of doing nothing and claiming that Hillary was intent on destroying the entire Democratic party.

When asked whether he had any qualifications at all to be commander in chief, clearly Obama had choices that existed between the extremes of do nothing and destroy Hillary's character. He could, for example, have tried citing a qualification? Novel, I know.

Yes, I would certainly characterize the claim that your opponent's objective is to destroy the party as being "negative". I might also characterize it as "self-defeating" and "absurd".

I certainly think that claiming she is secretive, dishonest, and will say or do anything to win are examples of ad hominem attacks.

And I'm confident that you are smart enough to recognize that as well.

by bobbank on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:00:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

"Clearly, for example, you could see that, when faced with the prospect that he would actually have to work for this nomination...."

And from there it just gets weirder.

I'm sorry, but you blew me away when you attributed the part of a Reverend Wright sermon were he said "Hillary Clinton ain't never been called a nigger" to the Obama campaign. You're suspect.

by Mostly on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:22:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

I'm sorry, were you not aware that he was a National Adviser to the campaign at the time he made that statement? Feel free to check some facts on that.

by bobbank on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 07:29:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

Sorry Bob, i reject almost every assertion you just made based solely on the premises. First, at no point during this entire campaign has Obama thought he was smooth sailing to the nomination. As a matter of fact, there was only one candidate who thought they were going to walk into the nomination and that was Hillary. Not a plan after Feb. 5, remember? And please show me where Obama said that HIllary was intent on destroying the Democratic party. Please don't conflate overzealous Obama supporters with the campaign. It is not the same thing.

Secondly, please point me to the quote where Obama was asked about his qualifications to be President and he said nothing but attacked Hillary. Providing evidence for such statements is critical here. And that is a novel idea, I know. I will wait patiently for the link.

Finally, is this about hypocrisy on the part of Obama or your disdain for negative campaigning?

by AHunch on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:26:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

yeah -that pretty much sums it up.

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 08:38:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (2.00 / 1)

It's a good trick. I wonder how long it'll work. Campaigns are about narratives and as long as the narrative is that Obama is "not negative", it doesn't really matter. The trick in politics is to be negative without appearing negative. I agree that it's hypocritical, but no more hypocritical than the usual campaign fare.

by the mollusk on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:34:44 PM EST

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (2.00 / 2)

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but its the first analogy that came to mind. Regardless of who wins the Democratic nominee, we are going to have to learn how to make lemonade out of lemons. It could be worse. We could be trying to make lemonade out of rotten potatoes like the Republicans with John McCain.

by zenful6219 on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:43:10 PM EST

The difference between (2.00 / 1)

The democrats and the republicans.

The democrats have lemons and are trying to make lemonade as something sweet.
The republicans have rotten potatoes and are trying to make vodka to drown their sorrows away.

Student Guy=JoeMentum. No really Student Guy=JoeMentum, after all JoeMentum was an embarrassment so is Student Guy. This sig is FAIL!!

by Student Guy on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:14:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (2.00 / 1)

By the way those who think the Rev. Wright situation is not hurting Obama in middle america , surveyusa has some polls out now showing him losing in critical battleground states Missouri , Ohio , Virginia .

Missouri is a bellweather state that shows you the impact of Wright .

If Obama cannot carry Missouri which I don't think he will , forget every other state in Dixie.

Clinton is winning in Ohio , Missouri and is within 2 in my neighbouring state , Kentucky.

I don't think Obama is going to carry ohio , Missouri or Virginia in a general election.

Wrigth is on everyone's minds here in Tennessee.

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 03:52:56 PM EST

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (2.00 / 0)

Hey lori....

Do people honestly think he believes the statements Rev Wright made in that 60 second loop?

I mean you gave me a new perspective on our military about how we need to be careful in Iraq with regards to leaving....But how any logical person could be swayed into believing Wright, Bosnia, Rezko, etc. is the meat and potatoes of this election is beyond me.

I mean with the economy, people losing their homes, healthcare, and so on. So now we should base our vote on who knew who when....Doesn't make any sense

A useless "Community Organizer" from Pennsylvania as noted by Republicans, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin

by hootie4170 on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:04:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

....who know who, and when....

Sorry

A useless "Community Organizer" from Pennsylvania as noted by Republicans, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin

by hootie4170 on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:06:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (2.00 / 1)

There is a strong string of patriotism and pride in your country in these parts.

I like Obama but I still can't get past him sitting in that church for all of those years , with the whole GD America stuff , frankly that video is very shocking to me.

The whole flag pin thing just compounds the problem , it is a different cultural and value system than folks in the North.

I remember when Bill Clinton came down here to campaign for her , you should have seen the rally , you would have thought it was Reagan that was in town with stars and stripes by Aaron Tipping playing.

Pledging of allegiance and 2nd amendments issues are values issue.

The strong sense of patriotism is why issues like his pastor and flag pin would probable be a negative for him in states like Missouri and Virginia

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:16:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

By the way I don't believe Obama holds the same view as his pastor.

However it is hard to explain why he would sit and listen to the Rev. for that long.

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:18:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

You should hear some of the stuff that comes from Catholic priest...To name the things he considers sins would take entirely too much time...However, if I believe him my ass is going straight to Hell...But it doesn't take away what I know about the church itself and what it stands for....helps the poor, good fellowship, a place that aids me in times of sorrow, hardships, and even bitterness...

A useless "Community Organizer" from Pennsylvania as noted by Republicans, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin

by hootie4170 on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:27:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yeah (none / 0)

All that screed about "hope" and "love your neighbor" and "helping the helpless" must've just corrupted Barack's soul from the inside out.

I don't know anyone who would have sat there and listened to a man of faith and wisdom who had marched with Martin Luther King, Jr. talk about fighting AIDS in my community. I mean, screw him, right?

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:51:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

Trust me there is a strong sense of patriotism in the North...IMO this exactly what the GOP wants voters to dwell on...Patriotism,character issues, gun issues, and immigration....Thus making the hardcore issues (economy, Iraq, healthcare, etc) a mirage, so to speak...It's true GOP tactics to get voters all worked up over who has more patriotism and who loves their country more and before you know it, we have another 4 years of GWB...Be careful on how people spin things......

A useless "Community Organizer" from Pennsylvania as noted by Republicans, Rudy Giuliani and Sarah Palin

by hootie4170 on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:22:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

Trust me there is a strong sense of patriotism in the North..

- Sure , I am not disputing that.

But a lot of this issues that you think are gop tactics are actually values that have been held deeply for centuries.

The GOP just understands that it is a values issues and a way of life held dearly , some democrats don't.

I don't doubt that Obama actually said what he believed in that San Fransico fundraiser but that is a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation.

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:31:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not "misunderstanding," (none / 0)

More like "misrepresenting." He said something that was fundamentally correct from a socioeconomic perspective, but wasn't as generous with his words as he should've been.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:53:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

I said it before, I'll say it again... WISHING that Wright would end Obama's chances, or his Bitter comments, or the fact his name isn't Hillary... WILL NOT make these things actually end his chances.

If wishes were horses, and horses were superdelegates, maybe you'd have a shot.

Fight the Smears!

by Lettuce on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:07:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (2.00 / 1)

right.... and this addresses the diary how?

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:09:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

Hmm.

By the way those who think the Rev. Wright situation is not hurting Obama in middle america , surveyusa has some polls out now showing him losing in critical battleground states Missouri , Ohio , Virginia .

Hillary has fallen in these as well.

Missouri is a bellweather state that shows you the impact of Wright .

If Obama cannot carry Missouri which I don't think he will , forget every other state in Dixie.

The most recent SUSA Missouri poll I could find 3/28, had Clinton down 9 in Missouri to McCain, Obama down 8.

Clinton is winning in Ohio , Missouri and is within 2 in my neighbouring state , Kentucky.

Pollster.com has Clinton ahead vs. McCain in Ohio, Obama behind. Both are well within the margin of error. Kentucky has Clinton up 2-1 over Obama, and I wasn't able to find anything on McCain vs. Clinton, but if you really think Clinton opens up Kentucky's votes in the general, I really really need the name of your dealer.

Wrigth is on everyone's minds here in Tennessee.

According to a 4/13 Rassmussin poll, Hillary loses by 14 to McCain, Obama by 27. A 13 point difference.

Clinton beat Obama in Tenn. by 13 points.

So, it may be on peoples' minds... but I'd guess it's not the first thing they've disliked about Obama.

So, to conclude -- you may wish that Wright is a dealbreaker, but it requires a very selective interpretation.

Now, wasn't it easy to just leave me be with my snark about horses?

Fight the Smears!

by Lettuce on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:35:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

Actually there are a bunch of them out now.

http://www.surveyusa.com/electionpolls.a spx

Obama was doing better in these states pre - wrigth , it was after wright that his numbers started dropping in Missouri in particular.

Educated in a small town Taught to fear Jesus in a small town Used to daydream in that small town Another born romantic that's me.

by lori on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:51:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not just Wright (none / 0)

Wright might've made an impact, but it's more that the campaigning had gotten negative, and there's a lot of primary fatigue in states that went in Super Tuesday or earlier. We want it to be over soon.

In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.

by Dracomicron on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:55:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

From Survey USA's own analysis (without actual numbers)

http://www.surveyusa.com/index.php/2008/ 04/17/april-head-to-head-contests-six-st ates-flip/

Last weekend, during the height of the reporting of Barack Obama's "bitter" comment, SurveyUSA was in the field conducting it's monthly head-to-head polling. Today, we have the results, showing six states flipping between last month and this month -- but not all necessarily in the directions you'd expect.

Full results to follow, but for now:

Two states where Obama led John McCain in March have flipped, with McCain now leading Obama.
Two states where McCain led Obama have also flipped, with Obama now leading McCain, for a net wash.
One state where Hillary Clinton led McCain has flipped.
One state where McCain led Clinton has flipped as well.
Overall, Obama gained ground in 7 of the 15 states we polled, lost ground in six, and remained steady in two; Clinton gained ground in 5 states, lost ground in 8, and remained steady in 2.

An in-depth look at Virginia -- one of the states that's flipping this month -- within the hour.

Fight the Smears!

by Lettuce on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:56:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

Didn't finish my post, but i think SUSA's analysis stands on its own merits. Without actual numbers (and MoEs) we can only look at these broad trends, but they're not the Obama-crusher that, once again, folks here an MyDD DESPERATELY seem to be hoping for.

Which is sad, really, since, like it or not, it's hard to imagine her being the nominee, math being the jerk that math is.

Fight the Smears!

by Lettuce on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:58:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why did you just insult lori? (2.00 / 1)

"the ignorant people in Tennessee" "closet racists" super patriots". What is the matter with you (badly named) DemUnity??

by ellend818 on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:10:38 PM EST

Re: Why did you just insult lori? (none / 0)

Funny, because I have North Carolinian's view of Tennessee (it's not very good) and I didn't notice that remark at all.

by Mostly on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:14:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (2.00 / 1)

Here's Obama's take on the debate:

"I have to say, Senator Clinton looked in her element. She was taking every opportunity to get a dig in there. Ya know? That's alright. That's her right. That's her right to kind of twist the knife a little bit," he said while making a twisting gesture with his hand.

He then scolded, "That's the lesson that she learned when the Republicans were doing that same thing to her back in the 1990s, so I understand it, and when you're running for the presidency then you've gotta expect it and ya know you've just gotta kinda let it, ya know.." As he trailed off, he brushed off his shoulders and laughed.

- Passive-aggressive?

by Apostle on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:53:00 PM EST

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

If you think that's passive agressive, feel free to joing my extended family for Passover Dinner.

Obama's comments are quite generous given the embarrassment that was ABC's debate. My family, on the other hand, would find a way to turn the blandness of the soup into a reminder of a time in which you, as a teenager, called your mom the b-word on the phone to your friend, not realizing she was eavesdropping on the other line.

It ends in tears.

THAT's Passive Agressive.

Fight the Smears!

by Lettuce on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:02:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

My favourite comment of the day.

by interestedbystander on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 05:14:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

while your sedar sounds as fun as mine, do you not see the irony in the 'change' candidate? BO claims to be about hope while continually bashing HRC. she does the same (although imo less) and that's politics - but at least she is not dishonest about it like some others.

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 08:48:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

This "irony from the 'change' candidate" line is ridiculous. You know its ridiculous. Everyone who uses it knows its ridiculous.

Saying: "I want to change things in DC as President" doesn't mean "roll over and take it." He's talking the overall process, not "I'll only fart rainbows from here on out." And mostly, his talk of 'change' has to do with what happens the day after the inaugeration -- and there are ideas not dissimilar than those that used to fill MyDD and Kos back in the day.

My biggest concern with Obama early on is that I wanted a "policy radical" -- like Dodd or Edwards -- rather than a "process radical" -- which is what you get from Obama.

Obama's change is primarily the end of the 50.1% Rove plan of governance. The idea is that you can be a "policy radical" till the cows come home, but you're not going to get the New Deal or the Civil Rights Act passed if 50.1% is all you want. These take a legitimacy that this administration never understood. And, that Clinton didn't understand. I really think -- and many agree -- that was the fatal flaw of the first round of Hillary Health.

Anyway, the process has to change; can you imagine what could be accomplished with a President who really inspires the country to sacrifice? His health plan or her health plan -- it's going to take serious salesmanship to beat the insurance companies again. Real economic reform -- same thing. The billionaires will pull every commie-lovin', apple-pie hatin' elitist barb they can if either democrat were to really go after the loopholes and exploitive laws that are bleeding the country dry.

That's frankly the best argument for a joint ticket for me; I still think no matter what, she's going to drive the health plan under an Obama administration -- he'd be a fool not to find a common ground between their two plans, and she'd be even more foolish not to join him. There's so little daylight really between them. Find another word for "mandates" -- and go on.

But Canadian Gal, you seem like a pretty smart person, and I respect many of your non-Obama-sucks comments. Can't you see the reality of what Obama's shopping as change as something other than a snark-magnet? When people talk about their inspiration from Obama, most that I know see it as a necessary tool to undo the Gingrich-Bush years.

It took a Clinton to clean up Reagan/BushI. Bill was a breath of fresh air -- unexperienced and overmatched, but got a lot of people, including me as a first-time participant, to re-evaluate what Government meant. He was an agent of Change -- and much more similar an agent to Obama than Hillary -- since the Clinton outsiders became the establishment.

I, and a lot of people think, it will take someone who can fill stadiums to get real change. And getting to that point is worth fighting for. And defending. Which is why it would be so much worse -- really bad -- if Obama didn't respond.

Anyway, if you're so inclined -- and if anyone else is reading -- lose the 'change' and 'hope' snark. Because if you think saying put-upon Americans 'cling' to religion is offensive to their faith and dreams -- what have you guys been doing to those of us "Obamabots" who dare remain here over the last few months?

Fight the Smears!

by Lettuce on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 10:44:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: the BO campaign without irony intended. (none / 0)

let me reiterate - i have no problem at all with BO going after HRC politically - 2 problems with this though....

1. BO and his campaign continually go after HRC personally

2. BO and his campaigns mantra is to call foul when she goes after him while he is just as bad (if not worse) than her

just sayin.

"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum

by canadian gal on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 11:00:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.