Update: The AP has a new article on Obama's many efforts at gun control.

***

At Wednesday's debate, Barack Obama wouldn't say what his position is on the DC law banning handguns. He dodged, saying he wasn't familiar with the facts of the case.

Of course, in November, his campaign told the Chicago Tribune he supporteed the ban. (Chicago Tribune November 20, 2007.)

But the campaign of Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said that he "...believes that we can recognize and respect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and the right of local communities to enact common sense laws to combat violence and save lives. Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional."

Tonight, Obama surrogate Bob Casey was on Lou Dobbs. Dobbs asked Casey whether Obama would support or oppose the DC handgun ban. (No link, I typed from his answer.)

Bob Casey: He would probably be a supporter, as he has been in the U.S. Senate and the Illinois legislature, for various restrictions on gun ownership. I happen to disagree with him on that, we have our disagreements.

More....

Update: John Dickerson at Slate on the hypocrisy between what Obama says and what his aides do.

***

As for Obama's positive message of hope and change on the campaign trail and how he won't be a typical politician but one who brings a breath of fresh air to Washington, here's what he said today:

Barack Obama cast his Democratic presidential rival Saturday as a game-player who uses "slash and burn" tactics and will say whatever people want to hear, a sharp jab at her character in the final chapter of the pivotal Pennsylvania primary campaign.

...."Senator Clinton has internalized a lot of the strategies, the tactics, that have made Washington such a miserable place."

...."She's got the kitchen sink flying and the china flying, the buffet is coming at me ... constant distractions, these petty, trivial, slash and burn, back and forth, tit for tat, politics."

Mirror, mirror on the wall? It's politics as usual from the candidate for change. [More...]

By Big Tent Democrat

Petey points to Obama's last PA ad - he's going Harry and Louise again on health care:

[Obama] ad attacks Clinton’s health care plan, saying it “forces everyone to buy insurance even if you can’t afford it."

Wonder if Ezra Klein will notice? Let me add that I have no opinion on the mandates question. I know too little about the issue. but if you say you care about it and have studied it and think mandates are good policy, you might be affronted by the use of GOP talking points to defeat a policy you think important. If you actually care about the issues, that is.

Update (TL): Hillary's response to Obama's ad which she say has "False And Widely Discredited Claims."

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

I am a long time critic of Move On, including their idiotic General Betray Us ad. Barack Obama was smart not to vote against the Senate resolution condemning Move On. Hillary Clinton made a mistake voting against it.

I find the outrage expressed by the "Creative Class" blogs on Hillary Clinton's critique of Move On quite amusing. What most amuses me about it is how none of these blogs are asking Barack Obama to do or say anything in defense of Move On.

It's funny to me because Barack Obama has studiously avoided acknowledging the existence of Move On throughout this campaign. My question for the "Creative Class" blogs is this, if what Hillary Clinton said was so bad, how come Barack Obama won't defend Move On against Hillary Clinton's attacks?

By Big Tent Democrat

When you read a Zogby poll, you have to try and figure out what he is trying to do. He is not just giving you numbers. He is massaging a storyline. Right now, Zogby's reputation is in tatters, so one would think he would just be trying to get it right. But I think there is more to it. I think he is trying to present a narrative. So what narrative do we get from this?

"Undecideds breaking to Clinton" is what he is trying to sell here I think. And he will try and sell that as some great Zogby insight. Is it true? Probably. They have in every other big state contest. But Zogby is a charlatan so beware Clinton supporters.

By Big Tent Democrat

Politico writes:

Nothing but petty, process-oriented questions, asked in a prosecutorial tone, about the Democratic front-runner’s personal associations and his electability. Where was the substance? Where was the balance?

Where indeed. Hillary Rodham Clinton and her aides have been complaining for months about imbalance in news coverage. For the most part, the reaction to her from the political-media commentariat has been: Stop whining.

That’s still a good response now that it is Obama partisans — some of whom are showing up in distressingly inappropriate places [They are referencing the Obama News Network, NBC] — who are doing the whining.

Boehlert's Revenge:

However unlikely, it's still possible Obama could lose PA and the nomination. If nominated, he could lose the election. Here's how, by a senior editor at The New Republic. It begins:

Some liberal commentators have downplayed the effect of Barack Obama's recent fundraising speech in San Francisco. But that's wishful thinking. Along with the revelations about Obama's pastor Jeremiah Wright, his remarks in San Francisco will haunt him not only in the upcoming primaries in Pennsylvania, Indiana, Kentucky and West Virginia, but also in the general election against John McCain, assuming he gets the Democratic nomination.

Go read the rest, and let us know what you think.

(Comments now Closed)

Barack Obama is hoping that a massive expenditure of cash on advertising will buy him the vote in PA and end Hillary Clinton's campaign:

Barack Obama is to mount the biggest advertising blitz of the presidential campaign this weekend ahead of Tuesday's Pennsylvania primary to try to force Hillary Clinton out of the race.

....Obama hopes to deliver a knock-out blow by outspending her in advertising. With tens of millions from fundraising at his disposal, he plans to spend well over $2m (£1m) on ads in the run-up to the primary, at least twice as much as the cash-strapped Clinton campaign.

Obama has earmarked $465,000 for Philly alone in the final days to Hillary's $91,000.

Obama's strategy, which he has deployed time and again during his political career, is that the more money spent on advertising, the higher the odds of winning an election.

If you want to help Hillary out, go here.

By Big Tent Democrat

If Chris Bowers is right about this:

In summary, Michigan and Florida will be seated, and there is only one delegation from each state for the credentials committee to consider. Not only is the Obama campaign not proposing different delegate slates, but they are actively working to make certain of the above delegate slates. Given all this, you tell me--what will the Michigan and Florida delegations look like at the convention?

We can sit around and debate whether or not this result is fair or acceptable all day. Hell, we have already been doing just that for three months now. However, this is not an abstract argument anymore. Michigan and Florida will be seated, and their delegations are taking shape as you read this. If the Obama campaign plans to dispute these delegations at the credentials committee, then it should say so and offer up a counter delegations. It has done neither. Until that changes, I am assuming pro-Clinton delegations of 73-55 from Michigan, and 105-67-13 from Florida.

Then never mind about all my dire predictions. But if Bowers is right, why doesn't Obama say so? The good will he would reap would be tremendous. I'll tell you why, cuz it is not true. That's why.

By Big Tent Democrat

Speaking for me only

If Obama wins the Pennsylvania primary, the race for the Democratic nomination will end. And if you believe Rasmussen, Zogby, LATimes and PPP, he has a great chance of doing that. These four polls have Obama down 3, 4, 5 and up 3 respectively.

Personally, I have no confidence in those polls, and will continue to trust SUSA, which has Clinton with a 14 point lead. But make no mistake, if Obama wins PA, it is over. And then perhaps, the Clinton hate will stop. It is imperative for Obama's chances that it stop. Obama's worst enemies now are his own rabid fans.

The new Gallup poll, taken after Wednesday's Philadelphia debate, has Hillary Clinton tightening Obama's lead. She moves to within 3 points of him.

These results are based on interviewing conducted April 15-17, with Thursday night's interviewing the first conducted following the April 16 debate in Philadelphia. The initial indications are that Obama may have been hurt by the debate, which was noted for its negative tone and focus on the candidates' recent "gaffes" and Obama's associations with the controversial Rev. Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers (a former member of the radical Weather Underground group).

In Thursday night's interviewing, Clinton received a greater share of national Democratic support than Obama, the first time she has done so in an individual night's interviewing since April 3. That stronger showing for Clinton helped to snap Obama's streak of statistically significant leads in the three-day rolling averages Gallup reports each day. Until today, he had led Clinton by a statistically significant margin in each of the prior 11 Gallup releases.

As to McCain and the Democrats: [More...]

CBS has a new poll on Pennsylvania college students. The predictable results: they favor Obama. (full results here, pdf.)

Oh but I was so much older then,
I'm younger than that now

Looking at Pennsylvania's demographics and current voter registration statistics (available here in Excel), 10% of PA's voters are in the 18 to 24 age group. 38% are over 55.

I'm not sure how many of those are college students. I suspect there are plenty of registered young voters who are not attending college.