Sorry to say that it won't be Jeff Smith. Running for Senate is much more difficult than running for an urban district, and he's not exactly popular around the state. For one thing, with him as co-chair of the Missouri SDCC, the Dems actually lost seats in the Missouri Senate in 2008. Lost seats in a wave year!! It's definitely not all his fault, but he doesn't have the profile for a statewide run.
I like Jeff and hope he continues to build toward a more prominent position. But 2010 won't be his year for the US Senate.
I totally agree. Us Edwards supporters had some good rah-rah diaries, too (every campaign needs at least a little of that) but I've seen way too many Obama diaries that reported little else but crowd size or a new endorsement.
Or look at the venom in this highly rec'd diary:
Obama Supporters Don't Work
by Sun dog [Subscribe]
Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 11:53:27 PM CST
Just thought I'd share an inspiring bit of soaring rhetoric from Senator Hillary Clinton out there lifting up the nation on the campaign trail.
But Mrs. Clinton, who has not done as well in the caucus states as Mr. Obama has, winning only two of nine so far, suggested that she did not expect to win in Washington, as many of her supporters would be too busy working to break away from their schedules and spend the time to caucus for her.
Mmmmmm. Savor it. That's some gooood politics. Thank you Senator Clinton.
So, you Obama losers, are you going to drag yourself away from your bong in your parents mansion long enough to show up and caucus? Or, wait. I thought Obama supporters were irrelevant because they're black? Those Jesse Jackson voters in South Carolina. So, I guess those folks just don't have jobs?
Those are the useless Democrats.
God she's lifting me up and making me so proud to have supported the party through the past twenty years.
Ok, now fight. Hillary would want it that way.
Tags: Snark, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Democratic Nomination, Recommended (all tags) :: Add/Edit Tags to this Diary :: Previous Tag Versions
Well, considering that Clinton's supporters tend to be lower income working people, and that it's more difficult for them to take off a shift to go to a caucus, she's got a fair point. The middle-income professionals that make up more of Obama's support can usually rearrange their schedules more easily to make that time commitment.
I appreciate this post, but Obama is doing so well not just because he has an internet fundraising edge, but also because he has an excellent ground game. That was what Howard Dean was lacking, after all.
I attended the Obama event in St. Louis. From the press section, I didn't think the crowd was all that big, because almost nobody was in the stands - the crowd was packed on the floor. But the actual number in attendance was well over 20,000 - the stadium floor was packed with people.
Here in St. Louis, Obama took a minute to praise Edwards and has retooled his stump speech to make sure that Edwards' antipoverty message does not get lost. I didn't hear anything negative about Edwards, and not much negative about Clinton, either.
I lean Obama, but stuff like this drives me up the freakin' wall. We are all united around puppies and sunny spring days, but we are NOT united around corporate greed, war, spying on American citizens, abortion, etc.