Obama swapping out

by Jerome Armstrong, Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:37:29 PM EST

Looks like some people may have just skipped right past the denial phase and into the anger, Daily Kos: Obama and Fox News, and MoveOn: Obama Got Outfoxed.

And howabout Jeremiah Wright this morning in the Q & A. Oh boy, talk about angry.

Obama, having successfully kicked the secular warriors that jumped on board his 'movement' to the gutter by embracing Fox, probably will follow up by doing some sort of ultra-distancing of Wright-- the kind I said he should have done right at the beginning of this whole fiasco. I imagine the "former pastor" becomes the "disavowed former pastor" and maybe even "former church."

The thing is, Obama is doing this with the conclusion in mind that he's got it all sewn up. He doesn't.




Tags: 2008 election (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 266 Comments :: Post a Comment


Wishful thinking, Jerome (2.00 / 4)

This primary election is over. Do you really think the Democratic Party is going to select the candidate in 2nd place for delegates, states, and popular vote (in the actually contested races)? Over the first African-American candidate with a real shot at the Presidency, who happens to be leading in all those categories? If so, you really don't understand Democratic Party politics as well as I thought you did.  There is no more loyal, crucial part of the Democratic Party base than African-American voters.  If you believe that a sizeable chunk, enough to cause us a 40 state defeat, won't sit on their hands during this election if the aforementioned happens, then you're smoking something that isn't quite legal. Particularly if Hillary is chosen for the latest metric in her campaign of unending goal post shifts, her better ability to reach white working class voters, the voters that alot of blacks think prefer Hillary, deep down, because she's white.

This is why there is no way in hell the superdelegates are just gonna throw the nomination to her and why they continue to move to Obama.  Choosing Hillary, in these circumstances, would be the Party commiting Hari Kiri on itself.  


by bigdcdem on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:40:12 PM EST

Re: Wishful thinking, Jerome (2.00 / 1)

Don't worry. We've been through this phase before. Jerome is trying to provoke with some of the comments he has received himself. Obama has not lost. This is a bump in the road. Look at the diagram I pasted below to see how insignificant it is.

Politics is politics, and there will be another gaffe and another poll, but the trend is unmistakable. Allow Hillary's supporters a brief moment in the sun. History is against them


by brit on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:42:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you obamacrats are (none / 0)

You haven't even the saving grace of being funny. You know there's a rule against 'contentless' posts?


by brit on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:42:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you obamacrats are (none / 0)

Yes. I put on my hipwaders this morning and went over to the orange sludge. What a difference! They are all really DOWN. There is a fatalistic tone - Obama is looking weak, he doesn't seem to have any more zip, he looks tired and bored, he is making too many mistakes, and they are finally beginning to wonder if he really can win the nomination.
Maybe some of the glow has come off the Chosen One!
by georgiast on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:44:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you obamacrats are (none / 0)

As I said, enjoy your moment in the sun


by brit on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:47:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: lol! (none / 0)

A good laugh is much needed these days I agree


by brit on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 06:45:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you obamacrats are (none / 0)

I am enjoying it, thoroughly!


by georgiast on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 07:24:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful thinking, Jerome (none / 0)

Well we'll be committing hari kiri with Obama so what's the difference. Essentially what you're suggesting is a sort of racial blackmail. Let Obama run or were taking our ball home. It's called cutting off your nose to spite your face. It's clear he can't carry the trad white democratic working class vote. Deny it if you want.  


by ottovbvs on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:07:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful thinking, Jerome (2.00 / 1)

Well we'll be committing hari kiri with Clinton so what's the difference. Essentially what you're suggesting is a sort of racial blackmail. Let Clinton run or were taking our ball home. It's called cutting off your nose to spite your face. It's clear she can't carry the trad black democratic working class vote. Deny it if you want.  


by Mostly on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:17:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful thinking, Jerome (2.00 / 4)

" Do you really think the Democratic Party is going to select the candidate in 2nd place "

Of course they will select the most electable candidate, Hillary Clinton. That is the purpose of the superdelegates, to vote for the candidate they believe will carry the party to victory, which is exactly what will happen. If Barack Obama does not then rally his supporters to unite with the rest of the party he will be to blame for destroying the Democratic Party chances in November.

I predict Hillary Clinton will win the November election even with a somewhat depressed turn out of AA voters, should that occur. Her supporters are far more committed and devoted and her appeal is broader than is commonly recognized. For the first time the voters are actually getting to know the real Hillary (thanks to the removal of Mark Penn's influence) and they are liking what they are seeing. Watch her negatives go down, her approval ratings go up, and feel the tide turning.


by 07rescue on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:08:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful thinking, Jerome (2.00 / 1)

Her supporters are far more committed and devoted...

Her performance in caucuses indicate otherwise.
by ChrisKaty on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:16:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hardly (2.00 / 2)

There are no caucuses in November to intimidate, cheat and disenfranchise voters.  Hillary wins where it's fair and where it counts.

***A


by adrienne4dean on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 08:23:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful thinking, Jerome (2.00 / 1)

Hillary Clinton has TERRIBLE electability problems - all the guilty-by-association things that are snagging Barack Obama, plus a whole lot more, plus the fact that she can't win without having perceived to have overturned the will of the voters.  If she does that she loses the general election.

If the superdelegates are given a choice between losing and keeping the party intact, and losing and destroying the party, I think you know what they'll choose.


by Mostly on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:27:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful thinking, Jerome (none / 0)

how did Hillary won all those biggest States?? electability problem, sure Barack has one.


by SHIBAM8P on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 06:43:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Where is Sista Souljah when you need her? (none / 0)

It is time for Obama to pull a Sista Souljah moment.  

I don't know who the victim needs to be but he needs to pick some left wing moonbat liberal carnival freak and cut them off at the knees.

If it was me I would pick Al Sharpton. He is useless anyways.


by dMarx on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:17:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

On Second thought ... (none / 0)

On second thought, I would pick Jeremiah Wright.  It is his fault anyways, he has brought it on himself, the glory hog.

Damn I'm smart.  Obama should hire me for his campaign.


by dMarx on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:23:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful thinking, Jerome (2.00 / 1)

Jerome, I'm not entirely sure what your point is.  The people that long ago wrote Hillary Clinton off are annoyed with Obama for appearing on Fox.  They probably knew it was going to happen anyway though.

They're not going to switch to the candidate whose turned Fox into a virtual sanctuary.


by Mostly on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:24:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful thinking, Jerome (none / 0)

Jerome's point is pretty simple to grasp. He's trying to incite Obama supporters.

I can't blame the guy seeing he doesn't have much else to grasp onto. Therefore he doesn't talk about policy or even Hillary in detail that much anymore.


!
by alex100 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 08:55:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Maybe it's time (2.00 / 1)

When I look at the size and strength of the Democratic National Committee that raised and spent about $50 million last year and the size and stength of Obama for America which is about 4 or 5 times the size and strength of the DNC, I wonder.  Is it time for a new party?

If DNC superdelegates step in and give the nomination to Clinton, I think I'd be ready.


by smoker1 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 06:06:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: riot is imminent (2.00 / 1)

politics by intimidation...
and Obama has to convince those remaining superdelegates because he won't get the 2025 needed to win.  

So who will be cheating???


by SHIBAM8P on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 06:38:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Good thing Hillary and her people haven't (none / 0)

sucked up to Fox.

/snark


by Pragmatic Left on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 08:03:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wishful thinking, Jerome (2.00 / 2)

Sorry...but this African-American, under 45 woman has been waiting for a candidate who has made the interests of women and children a centerpiece of her activism. I'm proudly supporting HRC and I believe all the votes should be cast and counted.  


by TinaH1963 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:22:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

So you're in the 8% (none / 0)

still voting for Hillary lol.  Haven't run into one of you for a while.  That's ok, sometimes its good to be different (just not this time).


by bigdcdem on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:20:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So you're in the 8% (none / 0)

I support my candidate because I believe she is the better one.  It is insulting to me that some seem to believe that blacks will only vote for black people--the people I know vote for the person they deem to be working for their broad interests--although I will say that sometimes that does include voting for people with whom they identify.  I define myself as an American, and want to see all Americans rise, and I feel HRC can lead us to that.  Mocking someone is crass.


by TinaH1963 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:25:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You're a strange one there. (none / 0)

Good luck with that (I don't think too many blacks find that argument convincing).  Like Chris Rock said, if this is going to be the first Black President, do you really want to have to tell your grandkids one day "yeah, but I was supporting the white lady." LOL

Imagine the look on their faces as their image of you is forever shattered.


by bigdcdem on Fri May 02, 2008 at 04:45:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're a strange one there. (none / 0)

This isn't strange at all.  I am looking at the candidate I deem better.  She has worked tirelessly for the constituencies I care about the most, women and children. They are the ones dispoportionately affected by poverty and violence. Her work ifor them is absolutely indisputable.  Granted, Senator Obama has done some work as an organizer, but she's done much more, and that sways my vote.  I don't think it's funny that every President since Washington has been male, just as I don't think it's funny that women candidates are constantly railroaded out of races (Chisholm, Schroeder, Braun, Benjamin et al).


by TinaH1963 on Fri May 02, 2008 at 09:47:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're a strange one there. (none / 0)

...typing too fast, can't spell.


by TinaH1963 on Fri May 02, 2008 at 11:00:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

According to grief management theory then they haven't actually suffered a major loss.

Just to stress my point on this particular false dawn


by brit on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:40:22 PM EST

Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (none / 0)

i don't know to what i attribute that movement from 20 days ago, but there is definitively a movement.


by likelihood zero on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:44:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (2.00 / 1)

Seen it. Seen that movement before. Obama is hitting the 'two candidate' plateau. Big deal. Hillary is running a very Morris-Rove salami slice of a certain part of the electorate. What a surprise! It doesn't change the fact that 90 per cent of the primaries are done and dusted. Nor, except in the wildest dreams of  fanatics, the idea that Hillary will become nominee in the summer, having lost two thirds of the primaries and caucuses, and somehow get elected in November.

Yes, there's still a way that through some disaster, planned or accidental, she could still be the nominee. But the majority who voted for Obama will not be energised to vote given the circumstances, and one sure bet would be this....

Go to intrade and make some money...

If Hillary gets the nomination through super delegate coup, she will lose the election.


by brit on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:56:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (none / 0)

Obamabot watch!!

Hillary:

a. Has won every big state on the board, and won when she had to.

b.  Is Still winning the Superdelegate count

c.  Has Won the last 3 major primaries

d.  Has Won the DEMOCRATIC primaries, where registered Democrats are counted, and Indy hangers-on, GOP, and crossovers do not create noise and cause trouble.

e.  Is beating McCain by higher margins in almost every major poll.

f.  Has Won the traditional Dem constituencies that always turn out and vote, the core of the Party:  White women, older Americans, working-class Americans.

g.  Is the stronger candidate against agsint FOX and the right-wing attack machine.


by dembluestates on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:07:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (none / 0)

She's still in second place, and by a good amount.


by Mostly on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:20:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (none / 0)

She's winning the popular vote, only down 8 delegates when you count all the states, and she's trouncing him in the public narrative right now.  

Fuzzy math and rules that aren't really rules aren't going to save Obama.


2004 swing state margins: PA-2%, OH-2%, IA-1%, WI-0.5%, MI-3%, FL-5%, NM-1%; Alienating 50% of the party is a luxury we can't afford.
by BPK80 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 06:03:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (none / 0)

you have all of this wrong.

she's winning the media narrative right now and that's about it. Fortunately for her, that's a big thing to have on your side.

but let's get real, the reason she's got the media on her side is for those ratings. The reason Jerome is acting like a pimple faced kid right now is for higher traffic.

Clinton has realy little to no chance of winning the nominee. Lest we start pulling out all her quotes (and her advisors) regarding MI and FL.


!
by alex100 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 07:48:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (2.00 / 2)

Get real ... by the numbers, neither Obama or Clinton can win by "primary election delegates", period. Even though a few more states will vote, unless either gets all the delegates, it's basically almost a tie.  The rules say in that case, the superdelegates are to use their own conscience in choosing a candidate.  And, in this situation, the one with momentum, the one who is winning NOW, and the one winning the media narrative does affect the superdelegates' "conscience". Especially, should Clinton win Indiana, and/or Obama not win NC or NC by a large margin, there will be even more questions whether Obama can "close the deal".  And, MI and FL may become an issue only in that Obama missed a chance to change that narrative by calling for the revotes that Clinton called for to enable the states to play by the rules correctly.


by PracticalMagic on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 10:48:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (none / 0)

"closing the deal" is an interesting concept but one that doesn't apply to this election. It's one reason why Hillary hasn't been able to get on any kind of roll this entire primary cycle. As soon as she gets a big win she suffers a huge setback that erases any large pledged delegate gains (TX/OH comparied to MS).

regarding MI/FL revotes, it wasn't on Clinton or Obama to "call" for a revote. I personally thought the two states needed to revote (regardless of the mess it would have been). Both states dropped the ball at the end of the day, from start to finish.

thanks for chiming in on your opinion on superdelegate "conscience". the progressive movement is so lucky to have mommy and daddy there to save us all from our votes.


!
by alex100 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:05:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (none / 0)

Well, the rules are the rules... so please remember they must play by the rules... MI & FL notwithstanding, and I agree with you on that stupid move by both states, the superdelegates do not have to vote with the candidate with the most pledged delegates, or with the popular vote, or even to vote for the candidate that "won" their state.  They indeed are tasked with voting their conscience to help "select", not "elect" who would be the strongest candidate, best President & likely winner in November.  The rules enable the superdelegates to overturn a poor primary election result or to ratify the primary election result. There is nothing sancrosanct about the most pledged delegates, unless the "magic number" is achieved. Moreover, the superdelegates can change their endorsements until they cast the first ballot in August in Denver.  So hang on, we're in for a bumpy ride !!!!


by PracticalMagic on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:20:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (2.00 / 1)

a. Define "big."  Wisconsin, Maryland, Virginia, Missouri, Illinois...all in the top half of state by electoral votes and all Hillary losses.

b. I'll give you this one, since it's plain fact and not spin.

c. I do love the Clinton rhetoric whereby some of us just don't count.  I'm a bit conflicted.  I both want Obama to win my state AND to actually count as a valuable American citizen.  Guess I can't have it both ways.

d. Please enjoy this diary from late February on that myth.  I haven't updated the numbers, but they are pretty overwhelming in one direction.

e. ...in April.  In other news, last September I thought I might like to have pizza for dinner tonight, but it turns out that I'm having chicken.  Funny how that works.

f.  You forgot a traditional Dem constituency...BLACKS?!?!?!?!?!?!?!  

g. Yes, she'll win them over by having McAuliffe praise their neutrality!  ALL HAIL FOX, the EVER-BALANCED!  And she's been so complimentary of McCain you'd think she's pushing for his VP spot.


No way. No how. No McCain.
by freedom78 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:25:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (2.00 / 1)

a.) true if we define "big states" as "states hillary won." even then, dumb argument. she'd carry illinois, he's carry cali, new york and mass. most likely ohio and penn too, once the dem machines were with him.

b.) she's down 59-6 since feb. 5 i believe. and also, she's only winning among party brass, not elected officials. that's worth pointing out.

c.) obama won eleven primaries before that. and nc won't be a "major primary" with its 115 delegates, but by clinton logic, the closer indiana will be.

d.) you need indies to win a general. she won't get 'em.

e.) one poll. ap-ipsos is the only one that shows any differential in ge races. even that's within moe

f.) yeah, blacks sure ain't a core constituency. oh, and obama's done just fine with whites outside of the appalachains. in november, he'll do fine with the rest of them too.

g.) proof? obama acquitted himself quite nicely sunday. fact is, the vrwc has laid off hillary and doused everything on obama. they're not doing that for the good of the dem party. if hillary's the nominee, we'll hear all the 90s stuff recycled, plus whatever else comes up. meanwhile, the most they have on barack is conjectured guilt by association.


by jbill on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:25:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (2.00 / 1)

The amazing thing is that you managed to come up with SEVEN POINTS which are all so easily demolished.

a) Illinois, Missouri, Georgia, Virginia

b) Is now only ahead by 20, having had a 200 lead. Watch that trend.

c) Seriously, she WON Texas? That's not what CNN or the delegate allocation says

d) Hold on. So no new registrations, no independents, and what about the Limbaugh vote? AND you're even wrong about her winning ALL primaries on the absurd and defeatist 'real democrat' scale

e) In polls today. Virtually every other poll in the last two months has shown them tied or Obama ahead.

f) Your definition of CORE is asinine, and is recipe for continued defeat.

g)  Appears more times on fox and uses right wing talking points I think you mean. Yes, they're supporting her now, big time. Guess why? Because they're more scared of Obama

Really. I've seen this moment in elections before. It's the sudden reprieve from a terminal illness moment. The patient, formerly on life support and feeling the drum beat of death in his ears, suddenly feels a whole lot better. There is a spring in his step, a feeling that anything is possible. He gets out of bed. He dances around. By some miracle cure he knows he will survive...

This story has a sad ending for the patient I'm afraid. It's not inevitable. But it's part of the cycle. Enjoy this moment while it lasts


by brit on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:28:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (none / 0)

Obama loses MO in GE. Just check the latest polls. McCain 50% Obama 42%  vs Clinton 47%  McCain 46%

Obama loses 24% of Democratic voters in MO.


by MOBlue on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:22:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (2.00 / 1)

Your D. and F. are true, however, those go to any democratic nominee, so if B.O is nominee he gets all (or most) of those votes, plus he gets the undecideds and youth vote.  He attracts newer and more diverse voters, that is a simple fact exhibited through exit polling, hence his lead.  

The other state strategies are debatable and again, states like California and New York aren't voting for McCain, they are strong blue for presidential GEs.

I am interested in seeing how this Rev. Wright issue will play out, as a BO supporter I thought Wright issue was over, but here we are, and now me thinks Mr. Wright might be a wee bit on the megalomanic side.  It kind of feels like W.W.E,  with the dramatic switching of sides and support (Supers, Wright, Richardson, etc.).  


Please don't associate moose with Palin, she likes to kill them.
by KLRinLA on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 07:51:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (none / 0)

Well Obama is going to lose it anyway.


by ottovbvs on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:08:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (none / 0)

Given your amazing prescience, do you know who's going to win the FA Cup final at Wembley too? I'd like to know, I could make some money on it.

Intrade have a good deal going on Hillary too 4:1. It hasn't budged - except to 6:1 - since early March


by brit on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:45:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (2.00 / 1)

Look at where Hillary Clinton is leading Obama - only among DNC superdelegates.  If that's not the elite I don't know what is.


by Mostly on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:19:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the AP-Ipsos latest poll (none / 0)

I am not talking about the primaries. It is virtually too late for the primaries, but there are troubles on the horizon in the GE.


by likelihood zero on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 08:02:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (none / 0)

Good Grief, where this graph came from... i bet I can do it better.


by SHIBAM8P on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 06:46:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (none / 0)

Then maybe you for make try, yes?


Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove.
by fogiv on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 07:38:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

Jerome, what do you think of Dean's comments this morning? Will we know in early June?

I think it's a done deal and they (the Super D's) will give it to Obama. I also think we're in for a loss in Nov.


by tabbycat in tenn on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:40:37 PM EST

Beating McCain will be a cakewalk (none / 0)

Don't kid yourself.

If we ever get there.


overthrow the government~participate
by missliberties on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:58:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: McCain beating Obama will be a cakewalk (2.00 / 1)

Wishful thinking.


by Mostly on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:21:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're right, Jerome (2.00 / 1)

If I were Obama, I would repudiate Wright's comments and continue going to the same church. I tell you this: if he divorces himself entirely from that church, there will be a tremendous loss of support in the African American community in North Carolina. It's already starting:

http://skepticalbrotha.wordpress.com/


I proudly support Barack Obama for President!
by Zeitgeist9000 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:40:40 PM EST

Pastor Wright (none / 0)

tells the truth.

I just wish he would tell it later.


overthrow the government~participate
by missliberties on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:43:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pastor Wright (none / 0)

True! About the only thing I stridently disagree with him on is Palestinian oppression and government infection of the black community with AIDS. He surely is provocative to say the least.


I proudly support Barack Obama for President!
by Zeitgeist9000 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:47:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pastor Wright (2.00 / 1)

He's said some crazy things, to be sure, but are you suggesting that the Palestinians are not oppressed?    


by HSTruman on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:50:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pastor Wright (none / 0)

HS Truman, that was a damn difficult question to answer. But I answer as honestly as I'm able:

I view the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through the lens of Old Testament scripture (Book of Judges). American diplomacy with respect to Israel is based on Old Testament, Biblical doctrine. That's the God's honest truth. And I support it.

I support Palestinian repatriation. But none of the neighboring nations (e.g. Jordan) are receptive to taking them in.


I proudly support Barack Obama for President!
by Zeitgeist9000 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:01:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pastor Wright (2.00 / 1)

I don't understand, at all, how our policy ought to be predicated on biblical doctrine.  If you want to flesh that out, I'd be interested to understand what you mean.  

Personally, I think that trying to arrive at a solution in that region based upon either groups' historical "claims" on that land is a recipe for disaster.  Neither side is going to ever get precisely what they want, and at some point the answer is a two state solution that will require an economically viable Palestine and a secure Israeli state.  The only discussion ought to be how we get there.  


by HSTruman on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:09:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pastor Wright (2.00 / 1)

You view it through testament scripture and if a few kids get blown to shreds having their breakfast that's tough.


by ottovbvs on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:10:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pastor Wright (2.00 / 1)

Repatration? How is that different from ethnic cleansing?  The Arabs have been there for 1600 years. Just because Jews claim it as their ancestral homeland doesn't give them the right to kick out the Arabs. The Serbs made the same claim about Kosovo.

And I'm Jewish, by the way. If we base our diplomacy with respect to Old Testament scripture then I want nothing to do with it.


by elrod on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:13:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pastor Wright (none / 0)

Not only are the neighboring states opposed to it, but the people who you would, erm, "repatriate" are opposed to it as well.

I'll give you an analogy: imagine if the US decided to ship all about a quarter of their citizens to Mexico.  That's what you're advocating.


by Mostly on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 06:02:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

re:aids (none / 0)

I want to hear WHEN he said that!

After tuskegee, black folks are entitled to some degree of paranoia.

But after scientific research figured out the blasted thing, well, then, any pastor sayin such shit ought to be cussed out by G-d himself!


His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?
by RisingTide on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:52:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: re:aids (2.00 / 2)

After the past eight years, ALL folks are entitled to some degree of paranoia!


by dark1p on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:20:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pastor Wright (none / 0)

"I stridently disagree with him on is Palestinian oppression"

Ha!! What is it exactly that you disagree with, they're not oppressed?


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:11:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Rev wright cited some good books... (none / 0)

including one that talked about experiments in the 1990's, on black youths (not related to aids).

here's another.
http://www.amazon.com/Emerging-Viruses-N ature-Accident-Intentional/dp/0923550127


His head is bowed. He thinks of men and kings. Yea, when the sick world cries, how can he sleep?
by RisingTide on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:15:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

As the first black President (2.00 / 1)

I wonder how Bill Clinton feels about this attack by the 'right' against the black church.


overthrow the government~participate
by missliberties on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:42:30 PM EST

Re: Wright isnt the "black church" (2.00 / 2)

Anti-Semite? I'm Jewish and I'm pretty sensitive to those things. I see no evidence that Reverend Wright is anti-Semitic. Praising Louis Farrakhan's prison ministry does not make Wright anti-Semitic.


by elrod on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:14:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: no one has attacked (none / 0)

Why do you hate Hillary?  Why do you hate America?


by Mostly on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 06:04:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (none / 0)

Jerome, Can you stop trying to create division? First the "More Perfect Union" speech was a new low for Obama, and now this?



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:42:52 PM EST

This is so sad.... (none / 0)

I could cry.

I will not vote for Hillary or the Clintons (Chelsea) ever.


overthrow the government~participate
by missliberties on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:47:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is so sad.... (none / 0)

Fine more Scalia's. Well he does have great personal charm.


by ottovbvs on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:12:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is so sad.... (none / 0)

You're not going to have to.


by Mostly on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 06:05:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (none / 0)

Probably a bit late in the game to expect the leopard to change his spot, or to stop putting the cat among the pigeons - to mix my metaphors with a feline vibe.

Obviously the constant harping on about Kos points to some kind of deep seated rivalry. But what would MYDD be like without the daily provocation to up the heartbeat and stir the keyboard.

One day these primary wars will be over though, and some people won't know what to do in civilian life.


by brit on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:48:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Embracing Fox? (2.00 / 2)

Thank you, Karl!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTGbI8pzv qk

Terry McAuliffe: "Let me say, Congratulations, fox news... Fair and balanced Fox!!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFEgd2gMe rA

Brit Hume: "It sure is nice to hear Terry McAuliffe say, as other Clinton operatives have, that Fox is fair and balanced... we'll take that and be proud of it"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ2nVor0b SI

Who, exactly, is embracing Fox?


by BlueinColorado on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:43:32 PM EST

Re: Embracing Fox? (2.00 / 1)

If were Clinton, I would be saying the same things in the context of NBC (National Barack Commentators). Now that Republicans are really losing, Fox truly is fair and balanced this cycle.


I proudly support Barack Obama for President!
by Zeitgeist9000 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:44:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Embracing Fox? (2.00 / 1)

Gee, I can't think of a reason FoxNews would be promoting Hillary Clinton's primary cadidacy.

You don't think they have some motives of their own, do you....??

Naaaawww. Kooky talk.


by BlueinColorado on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:47:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 6)

I'll say this for Kos, he's willing to criticize his own candidate.

Don't see that every where in the 'sphere....


by BlueinColorado on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:44:42 PM EST

mmmm.... not really (2.00 / 2)

I know some people are upset that Obama "threw Daily Kos under the bus", or other such nonsense. He didn't.


by BlueinColorado on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:51:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: only after Obama threw Kos under the bus (2.00 / 2)

ummm... Wrong.

-- Markos in the link Jerome provided

I know some people are upset that Obama "threw Daily Kos under the bus", or other such nonsense. He didn't.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:51:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: only after Obama threw Kos under the bus (2.00 / 2)

Kos doesn't think Obama threw him under the bus, actually.  And he still supports Obama.  He just doesn't think the guy is perfect.  Which makes sense, since he's not.  He's just the best alternative among a group of imperfect options.


by HSTruman on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:52:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

I was going to make the same comment.  Kudos to him for having the honesty to criticize the guy he supports when he thinks he's done something wrong (even though I don't happen to agree with him).

You could learn something from that, Jerome.


by ChrisKaty on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:01:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (none / 0)

i think jerome is having too much fun to care, honestly.

even if his preferred candidate at this juncture will get beat.


!
by alex100 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:12:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He went on Fox (none / 0)

and mentioned that Wright is no longer his Pastor.


overthrow the government~participate
by missliberties on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:45:26 PM EST

Re: He went on Fox (none / 0)

He's already been to the Whitehouse for both Bill Clinton and LBJ, and those were much more conservative times.


by Mostly on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 06:07:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 2)

Of course Obama has it sewn up; have you just not been paying attention, Jerome?

Clinton is mathematically unable to overcome his deficit, and the SD's sure as hell aren't going to overturn the pledged delegate winner.  You're living in a fantasy world if you think any differently.


by Cycloptichorn on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:46:02 PM EST

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 3)

Is that why in the last poll of undeclared superdelegates, the overwhelming answer was that they would not vote for the pledged delegate winner,  but the most electable candidate?

Superdelegates don't have to vote how you tell them to. Stop changing the rules in the middle of the game. Now that Obama's not electable, maybe you can make the superdelegates vote for the bigger race baiter in the game...


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:48:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

When you say Obama is 'not electable,' it's a completely false and idiotic assertion.  For, you see, he most certainly is electable and will be elected here pretty soon.

The super-delegates are not going to overturn the pledged delegate leader.  There's not evidence whatsoever that this will happen and an extremely strong case as to why it won't.  There are MANY s-d's who are on record as saying they will vote for the candidate who has the most pledged delegates at the end of the primaries; that's Obama, without a doubt.

You ought to face the reality of the situation rather then whining about changing the rules; nobody is forcing the s-d's to vote a certain way by changing the rules, only by recognizing the reality of Democratic doom that would follow such an idiotic move.  Huge percentages of the party would either defect or stay home... and you can forget about the AA vote for the rest of time.  Not going to happen.


by Cycloptichorn on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:54:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

Stupid, stupid, stupid.  Open your ears and listen to what the DNC is saying:  Howard DEan has been saying for two days straight that the SD's are not boujnd to anything, that their only job is to select the best candidate.  NOTHING about pledged delegate counts, about popular vote, about states won, NOTHING.

That is a direct message to Obama's campaign:  Look out below!!  Obama's star is falling.


by dembluestates on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:12:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

That isn't what he has said, or is saying, whatsoever.  

Just last week, Clinton supporters were bitching about how Dean is in Obama's corner; now it's the other way around?  I can't keep up with every new little twist that you guys try and take with the logic, lol.

Those who think the pledged delegate leader is going to be over-turned don't understand a single thing about politics.  No elected official wants to piss off huge segments of their voting base.  Especially not to put in a candidate who is guaranteed to bring out the opposition in droves.  You aren't using your head, and instead thinking with some other part of your body, which suspiciously resembles a set of buttocks...


by Cycloptichorn on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:15:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (none / 0)

"Huge percentages of the party would either defect or stay home... and you can forget about the AA vote for the rest of time.  Not going to happen."

If Barack Obama does not rally his supporters to unite to elect Hillary Clinton after she is nominated his political career with be over. Finito.

She will win without his supporters, if they choose to stay home. She has what it takes, and has been improving as a candidate on a daily basis (minus Mark Penn). I promise you, she will be our next president, and will be one of the greatest presidents in our history as a country.


by 07rescue on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:20:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

sorry, but she won't win the nomination. and if you think you can win without the African American vote, you've truly lost it.


by jbill on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:32:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

Sorry, but you are wrong on several counts.  

Most notably the assertion that Clinton will be the next president; your promise simply isn't worth much, as you have no special information showing that the leader of this race is in fact going to lose.

Second, that she 'has what it takes' to win without Obama's supporters.  This is a factual farce of a statement.  It shows a disconnect from reality to claim such a thing.


by Cycloptichorn on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:41:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (none / 0)

You know, if Hillary had some amazing legislative and public service record, I could agree with you.  Unfortunately, she has not.

She has backed shitty warmongering and been a failure.  She has backed good healthcare legislation and done a shitty job getting it passed.  She has run a shitty campaign for president despite every possible advantage.  

Where I come from, that is not the basis for one of the greatest presidents in the history of our country.  It is the formula for a shitty president.


by zadura on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:50:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (none / 0)

The 'overwhelming majority of superdelegates' you are referring to don't add up to the 'overwhelming majority' of 80-85% percent of the remaining superdelegates that would have to band together for HRC to get the nomination.

And please don't start back on the 'but the others can change their mind' track. Sure they can, but do you really think that is going to happen in any significant numbers?


by tysonpublic on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 09:53:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 2)

One might think Jerome hasn't made it past the denial phase yet.


Check out McCain.
by you like it on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:49:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

Do me a favor - point me to the drop in the polls that Obama has had due to the 'damaging information.'

thanks for playing tho!


by Cycloptichorn on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:05:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (none / 0)

Sure thing.

Gallup daily tracking, April 20: Obama by 8

Gallup daily tracking, April 27:  Obama by 1

Newsweek poll Obama

3/5-6  Unfavorable 28

4/24-25 Unfavorable 40

Over 45% increase iin unfavorable ratings.


by dembluestates on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:19:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

Uh, who cares about the daily tracking polls?  They go up and down constantly.  

And his unfavorability ratings aren't really relevant to his electoral prospects; otherwise you would agree that Hillary is f*cking doomed, as hers have been sky-high forever.

Selective cherry-picking leads to crappy analysis.  If Obama is so hurt, why is he still leading Clinton?  The truth is that he has not been significantly damaged by any of the news that has come out.

On this graph - a poll of polls - can you show me where his numbers have dropped due to bad news?

Nah, you can't.  


by Cycloptichorn on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:36:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (none / 0)


You're assuming people who say "undecided" are undecided.  They aren't.
by killjoy on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:48:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (none / 0)

Please link to the post in which I assumed that those who say 'undecided' are in fact undecided.


by Cycloptichorn on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:54:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

The great Jerome is not only a pundit but now he reads minds, I bow to his greatness.


"I am standing with Barack Obama to say, `Yes, we can!'" Hillary Clinton 6/7/08
by feliks on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:47:13 PM EST

Re: Obama swapping out (2.00 / 1)

I just posted this in the Polls for it All thread, but since that's scrolling down I'll re-post it here to see what you have to say about it:

Right now Obama is +135 per RCP.  Let's say that doesn't change with the remaining primaries (a decision that should help Clinton because of NC).

Politico says there are 240 remaining uncommitted supers.

Now...this is that crazy "math" part.  In order for Clinton to come even to Obama, she needs a +135 net from the remaining supers.  So she would need...wait for it...to go 187-53 with the supers (giving Clinton the rounding error).

187-53 among remaining supers.  Is that going to happen?

Of course, adding MI or FL into the mix makes this slightly more complicated.  But the chance that supers actually hold off until the convention, which is the only scenario in which MI and FL are relevant, I think is next to nothing.

...so what's your end-game, Jerome?  Do you think supers are going to hold out until the convention, and a FL/MI/superdel bomb will give it to Clinton?

Do you think that's reasonable given the expressed sentiments of Pelosi, Reid, and Dean?


by randomscientist on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:47:28 PM EST

Yes Jerome (2.00 / 1)


   many of us who support Obama are not unable to criticize him when he screws up.

  As opposed to many Clinton supporters on this site, who flatly deny that Hillary has said or done anything even remotely unfair to Obama.

  Several of us are pissed that Obama caved. That shows us to be objective.

   As opposed to Clinton supporters who thought what Ferraro and Johnson said was perfectly ok, who thought that Hillary being the first Dem to use 9/11 as a scare tactic was just fine.

  Several Clinton supporters can't criticize her, while we can criticize him. it's the differece b/w supporter and Hero-Worship.


by southernman on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:48:20 PM EST

Re: Yes Jerome (none / 0)

No no no. You don't get it, we are the ones that are blind not Hillary's supporters. Who cares if she makes racist statements. Jerome's response, "I've been to Africa I can't be a racist."


by cranberry on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:52:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Agreed. (none / 0)

I do still prefer Obama, but this was a big mistake he made and a huge opportunity wasted.

I'm pissed, it goes to show how much more work we progressives still have to do.


Check out McCain.
by you like it on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:53:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes Jerome (2.00 / 1)

Frankly, DKos seems to be split pretty much 50/50 on this.

There was outcry beforehand, handwringing during and declarations of failure afterwards.

As someone who spends a decent amount of time on either blog, I'd have to say that the reception on DKos has shown a lot more variation than similar actions by Clinton have here.


by Capt America on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:55:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes Jerome (2.00 / 1)


  I do. And Clinton used that tragedy to scare voters...she's the first Democrat to do so. The fact that you condone that says a lot about you.
by southernman on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:00:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: bs (2.00 / 1)


   It's fact. She's the first Democrat to use the image of Bin Laden in an ad against a fellow Democrat while saying he's weak and unable to lead the country.

  The very first. She used a terrorist attack to rationalize her candidacy.

  The fact that you can't see that proves one of two things...you are actually blind or selectively blind.


by southernman on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:10:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: bs (2.00 / 0)

Um, no, actually, Kerry ran an ad in 2004 that morphed Howard Dean's face into Osama Bin Ladens'.

On November 7, 2003, a strange new group no one had ever heard of called "Americans for Jobs & Healthcare" was quietly formed and soon thereafter began running a million dollar operation including political ads against then-frontrunner Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean. The commercials ripped Dean over his positions or past record on gun rights, trade and Medicare growth. But the most inflammatory ad used the visual image of Osama bin Laden as a way to raise questions about Dean's foreign policy credibility. While the spots ran, Americans for Jobs-through its then- spokesman, Robert Gibbs, a former Kerry campaign employee-refused to disclose its donors.



by skohayes on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 08:10:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes Jerome (2.00 / 1)

Would you like to prepare a scale of tragedies?
Great depression
Civil War
Vietnam
Jim Crow
Dust bowl
Native Genocide
Pearl Harbor
Katrina
Galveston Hurricane
Johnstown Flood

9/11 was a big deal but as with everything that seems to happen in America Hyperbole seems to creep in. The problem with 9/11 and its deification is that it has been used as a device to create a mass of totally counterproductive policies that have been largely a costly failure and done great damage to our great Republic.    


by ottovbvs on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:19:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes Jerome (none / 0)

The ad that mentioned 9-11 was a montage that featured the many events of our time (Katrina, etc.).  While you may not have liked that the Clinton campaign included 9-11 in it, it is surely one of the big events of this century.  Sen. Obama has questioned HRC's fitness to lead and she is questioning his--there is no attack, just a difference in who she perceives is better equipped to handle crisis.


by TinaH1963 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:30:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wright is insane (none / 0)

I've read all kinds of stuff like that about Churchill wanting to get the US into the war, or about ignoring the aerial photos about Auschwitz... scratch anybody and they have some weird conspiracy theory.

When did you start being interested in the Rev Wright. Nothing to do with these primaries I assume


by brit on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:51:33 PM EST

Re: ANYONE (none / 0)

So basically, anyone who has a different opinion about FDR than you do is insane?

You seem to be basing your argument of Wright's sanity on simply your mere opinion of FDR's character. That's extremely weak.


by Aris Katsaris on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:11:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: ANYONE (none / 0)

Nuts but not particularly dangerous. I mean, he's not running for president. I'd be pretty scared if someone running for president didn't know how to press the CAPS LOCK key off too. Who knows they might hit the wrong button in the bunker. But you're not running for president either I assume (unless your handle is a sobriquet for Gravel) so I'm not unduly worried.

But thanks for the warning anyway.


by brit on Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 05:11:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: ANYONE (