home

Obama To Speak In MO, BEFORE The Polls Close

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:03:54 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

I wonder about this. CNN is reporting Obama will speak from Missouri within the hour BEFORE`the West Virginia polls close. I believe that is a mistake. Does Obama really need to spin now? He needs to fight for these voters. This is not the way to do it. (6:15)Obama speaking now. Talking about Dems not being divided and clear choice in November. Sounds like the standard stump speech.

Imo, this is bad from the Obama camp.

Exit poll - Clinton wins 69% of the white vote, 71% of women. This is a biiiiig won.

Exit poll. Experience voters - Clinton 93-3. Changers voters - Obama 53-45.

Jerome Armstrong makes a great point:

Since it looks like Clinton is being predicted to gain over 60 percent of the votes in WV, I thought I'd list which other state primaries have given such high margins:

* Arkansas (70%) Clinton

* Georgia (67%) Obama

* Illinois (65%) Obama

* Virginia (64%) Obama

* Maryland (62%) Obama

* Mississippi (61%) Obama

This makes the likely result of the West Virginia result a bad one for Obama. It can not be explained away, even by the Obama News Network.

< More West Virginia And Other Matters | Early W. Va. Exit Polling >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Obama To Speak In MO, BEFORE The Polls Close | 128 comments (128 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I actually think it's a good move (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Dalton Hoffine on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:05:49 PM EST
    He knows he's going to lose and lose badly. The networks are all going to be focusing on Clinton's big win, and he really wants to get the message across while he has his own airtime that he's fighting for the GE votes in places like Missouri, and it'll give him time to take shots at John McCain. I think it's an attempt to control the conversation LATER in the evening so that the media has another story than just Clinton's numbers.

    It is disrespectful to West Virginian voters (5.00 / 15) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:07:29 PM EST
    It is not fighting for or caring about the very voters he is going to have trouble with in November.

    I believe it is completely boneheaded.

    [ Parent ]

    That's Because You Think He Has (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by BDB on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:11:08 PM EST
    the nomination sewn up.  Based on his actions, I'd say he is far from sure of that.  Why, I'm not sure because I think he's very likely to be the nominee.  But his recent actions make me wonder about what he's hearing from SDs.

    [ Parent ]
    or what he is not hearing. (5.00 / 4) (#10)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:13:06 PM EST
    like why they havent endorsed him already.

    [ Parent ]
    Makes me wonder, too (5.00 / 3) (#121)
    by chrisvee on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:42:35 PM EST
    If he thinks he's the nominee, you'd think he'd be in WV trying to change hearts and minds. Instead, he's elsewhere.  Is he seriously writing off WV for the GE?  WV should go Dem and if we're writing it off, I find that disappointing and troubling.

    I think part of the perception problem that Obama has is that he seems to shy away from tackling problems like this head on.  He contrasts poorly with Clinton, who has appeared in loads of places and venues where she was clearly unwelcome. It makes Obama potentially look either weak or disinterested by comparison as if he lacks political fortitude.  It's easy to appear in front of adoring crowds but harder to show up when the room is hostile.  Again, it's a perception thing.

    [ Parent ]

    It is only 3:00 in Oregon. (none / 0) (#33)
    by ineedalife on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:24:52 PM EST
    That in my mind is what Obama needs, a big white-voter endorsed win. His attempt to upstage Hillary here will not be heard  there. He should have waited a few hours to get his free national air time.

    [ Parent ]
    Where is (none / 0) (#86)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:47:18 PM EST
    it being heard? Im in EDT and no one here will watch it because it is during supper time.

    [ Parent ]
    Boneheaded Is obama's Other Middle Name! (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:11:30 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    didn't he give himself that name? (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by bjorn on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:21:22 PM EST
    The Rezko thing was a boneheaded mistake or am I dreaming that?

    [ Parent ]
    You Are Correct... (none / 0) (#129)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 10:12:35 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    WV: Not Part Of His Electoral Map (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by flashman on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:13:25 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Funny Because I Was Pretty Sure (5.00 / 7) (#15)
    by BDB on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:15:27 PM EST
    Obama was running a campaign specifically designed to be unifying.  

    And please explain to me how it's a good sign for Obama's GE chances that he has to write-off a state where there are far more registered democrats than republicans.  I'm suppose to believe he can win Virginia when he can't be bothered to even try to win West Virginia.  Yeah, that's going to work out very, very well in November.  For McCain.

    [ Parent ]

    He is unifying (5.00 / 5) (#18)
    by madamab on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:16:37 PM EST
    the Democratic voters against him!

    [ Parent ]
    Nope, He Never Was (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by flashman on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:19:45 PM EST
    running a unifying campaign.  His strategy was to make a "new" coalition of Western states, elete, young, hip voters, throw out the rest of us.

    Don't feel bad; we all fell for the "unifying" theme at one point or another.  

    [ Parent ]

    Speak for yourself... (5.00 / 9) (#24)
    by madamab on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:20:54 PM EST
    I always thought he was trying a bit too hard to unify with Republicans instead of Democrats.

    ;-)

    [ Parent ]

    Oh Yea, (5.00 / 4) (#40)
    by flashman on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:28:09 PM EST
    I left Republicans out of my list of the "new" coalition.  I'll never forget when he praised Ronald Reagan as the "transformative figure of the 20th century."

    I never thought much of his rhetoric about bringing Republicans over to his site.  Really, Mitch Maconnell?  John Boehner?  It was time for a reality check.

    [ Parent ]

    That was my impression as well (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by bridget on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:36:50 PM EST
    I was listening to his speech just now ...

    am I the only one thinking that the mostly young people sitting behind him look a bit bored? They don't seem that interested in what he has to say it seems to me.

    And yes, it's v. very odd that he speaks so early  on election day.

    [ Parent ]

    Nope, never liked that Unity Pony! (5.00 / 4) (#39)
    by alexei on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:27:32 PM EST
    Flirted with Edwards but kept remembering all his Senate votes and his 2004 Presidential run.  Looked at Hillary again and remembered her as First Lady and then no looking back for me - she was my candidate and was more impressed with her as the campaign went on.  The opposite for Obama, he was worse the more I got to know him and I think that is what is happening with most voters besides the AAs and the leftists (funny, before this campaign season, I always identified myself with the left, but, pretty ironic that I don't now).

    [ Parent ]
    i feel you. (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by The Realist on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:14:43 PM EST
    I used to wear my left pin and rubber wrist band ( a dangerous choice in Texas)proudly. It is amazing that i apparently find myself, a gay man, not as left as i thought.

    [ Parent ]
    Neither Obama nor his (none / 0) (#126)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue May 13, 2008 at 07:13:21 PM EST
    supporters are even remotely leftist.  I don't know why some folks keep saying that. Hillary isn't, either, but she's a darn sight closer to the actual left than Obama.


    [ Parent ]
    Totally with you. n/t (none / 0) (#60)
    by Lil on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:33:59 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    do you respect yourself in the morning? (5.00 / 3) (#48)
    by Salo on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:29:37 PM EST
    I hate unity. Sounds like a form of fascistic manufactured consent.

    There is a very good reason why we have an adversarial legal and political system.

    [ Parent ]

    bite your toung (none / 0) (#61)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:34:13 PM EST
    hate unity indeed


    [ Parent ]
    I Respect Myself Always (none / 0) (#131)
    by flashman on Wed May 14, 2008 at 09:48:00 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Please Don't Include Me In Your WE (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:42:43 PM EST
    The "Unity pony" went over like a lead balloon with me and most of my friends and family.


    [ Parent ]
    Now.... (none / 0) (#130)
    by flashman on Wed May 14, 2008 at 09:31:43 AM EST
    I never said we all espoused the unity sthick.  The post I was responding to said he thought O's campaign was geared that way.  We learned later he has more of a "divide and conquer" strategy.

    No, I don't speak for anyone else when it comes to their affections.

    [ Parent ]

    he's a rude one isn't he? (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Salo on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:23:20 PM EST
    I guess he'll have all the tactics for facing McCain.

    Does he realize that experience and a fat reume might be a QUALITATIVE judgement by voters that is sincerely an INTRINSIC value?

    It's not a talking point for some people.  

    [ Parent ]

    It's a relatively small crowd (none / 0) (#35)
    by vigkat on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:25:38 PM EST
    But MSNBO is covering it in full apparently.  The camera has not left his face since he started.  I can't gauge his effectiveness here.  I don't get much out of his speeches.  

    [ Parent ]
    It's not hard. (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by Fabian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:29:57 PM EST
    "Me!"
    "Hope!"
    "Change!"
    "Unity!"

    I think that's the basic message.

    [ Parent ]

    going by the bored-looking girl... (5.00 / 4) (#52)
    by Dawn Davenport on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:30:46 PM EST
    ...blowing bubblegum bubbles over his right shoulder, I'd say his inspiration isn't all that today. ;-)

    [ Parent ]
    i am not near a tv (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by bjorn on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:32:20 PM EST
    so I love the color commentary, thanks!!

    [ Parent ]
    Whoa, Tweety (5.00 / 3) (#69)
    by vigkat on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:37:24 PM EST
    just asked, "who was the advance man on this seance down there"?  He's apparently disgusted with the fact that the town hall was so subdued and Obama was anything but charismatic.  The newly strident Rachel Maddow leaps in to protect Obama.  Eugene Robinson is now pontificating about the math. Buchanan is painting poignant pictures about the people in West Virginia.  David Gregory is, well, not saying much but talking a lot.  Rachel is really wound up.  Okay, I'm changing the channel.  Geez Louise.

    [ Parent ]
    you were brave! (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by bjorn on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:43:08 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    100 people are in attendance... (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by kredwyn on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:38:21 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Little Background On Where Obama Is Speaking (5.00 / 3) (#106)
    by MO Blue on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:06:14 PM EST
    Cape Girardeau is where the radio star Rush Limbaugh was born and started his on-air career, and it went overwhelmingly for George W. Bush in 2004.

    Bet that appearance will improve his poll numbers in  MO.

    [ Parent ]

    Unonfirmed: BO Honestly SIncere (Branson townhall) (none / 0) (#127)
    by Ellie on Tue May 13, 2008 at 07:25:53 PM EST
    I haven't viewed the clip but the accompanying email said it was a way-white crowd and Obama knocked'em out.

    [ Parent ]
    agreed... (none / 0) (#70)
    by kredwyn on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:37:30 PM EST
    My thought was "Oh dear."


    [ Parent ]
    Of course it is. (5.00 / 10) (#14)
    by madamab on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:14:12 PM EST
    I think his whole "I won! I won! HRC doesn't exist!" strategy is absolutely wrongheaded and insulting. This latest tactic is just more of the same from Obama.

    If he were really a lock for the nomination, he would graciously concede HRC her night instead of trying to steal the spotlight from her by speaking from another state whose primary is over.

    But of course, he's not a lock for the nomination, and he knows it.

    Every day he shows us how immature and unable to deal with setbacks he is. I think more and more people are realizing he's not ready to be President.

    [ Parent ]

    It would be the right strategy if he were (none / 0) (#17)
    by MarkL on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:16:05 PM EST
    uncertain of a win.

    [ Parent ]
    It's not the right strategy no matter what. (5.00 / 7) (#20)
    by madamab on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:18:25 PM EST
    That's what's so ridiculous.

    If he IS the nominee, he is ignoring West Virginia for no reason.

    If he is NOT the nominee, he is ignoring West Virginia for no reason.

    It's a complete and total loser.

    [ Parent ]

    I do wish he could (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by vigkat on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:28:29 PM EST
    stop talking about the social security "problem."  It's making me nervous.  

    [ Parent ]
    That is yet another reason (5.00 / 4) (#58)
    by madamab on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:33:19 PM EST
    I don't like Obama on the issues.

    "Social Security is in crisis," according to him.

    When HRC fired back "That's a right-wing talking point," I just loved her for it. I was still into Dodd or Edwards back then, but she sure won that debate.

    [ Parent ]

    I was for Edwards (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by vigkat on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:47:49 PM EST
    But I loved it too.  She started capturing my attention before Edwards dropped out.  Obama never captured anything but negative attention from me.  I have never been able to understand his appeal, and I attended his break-out session at the big orange convention in Chicago last year.  I seriously didn't get it. I still don't.

    [ Parent ]
    You are so right... (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by americanincanada on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:19:01 PM EST
    again.

    It is the strategy of someone who is not sure of a win. I think he is getting nervous that the supers are staying quiet. he knows his electability problems.

    I am hoping someone goes to him to have a little talk after WV and Kentucky. I doubt it will happen because the party seems intent on losing the whitehouse. But one can dream that clearer heads will prevail.

    At this point I don't even care if they force Hillary to put him on the ticket as long as she is on top.

    [ Parent ]

    Bushian triumphalism ... but you gotta win first (none / 0) (#128)
    by Ellie on Tue May 13, 2008 at 07:39:08 PM EST
    I can only assume that's what they're going for with this show of d!ckishness.

    Don't know who's advising Obama, but this show of primacy only works AFTER a tough won -- in this case, at the very least, 2209 or the White House.

    An end zone dance after a routine touchdown is kind of lame. You do it when it's worthy of an annual highlight reel (and whatever is equivalent to the contest).

    Doing it here is like dancing around in the ring before the fight's over. It gets people begging to see the fool get his block knocked off.

    [ Parent ]

    But BTD, if he stops spinning (5.00 / 8) (#3)
    by BDB on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:09:15 PM EST
    people might stop and think and realize that his nomination is not required by The Math, that he is just as dependent on SDs as Clinton is, that counting the popular vote is not the same as tallying voters' heights, that he's been bleeding support in matchups with McCain for two months.  

    He isn't running across the finish line, he's being pushed by the media.  If he stops spinning, they might stop pushing and then where will he be?

    He's trying (5.00 / 4) (#16)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:16:03 PM EST
    to push a dying and gasping unity pony across the finish line. The longer this goes on, the more obvious it becomes that he's a general election loser.

    What I can't understand is why Obama wants to be the nominee and then lose the election? Does he not realize the problems that he has and the very slim chance he has of winning against McCain?

    [ Parent ]

    Its about Ego (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by Virginian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:08:41 PM EST
    Did Kerry want to be a GE loser? No, but he was DOA too...Obama thinks he deserves to be president, that he is entitled to it; in other words, he's bought into his own spin. It happens...the problem is, Obama is going to drain our party, all the resources, all the energy people have put into it since 2004, and still may not win...that is a real problem. I just truly hope Obama keeps getting this free ride from the press, without that, we're toast...it sucks that in a year we should be a shoo in...we're completely dependent on the whims of the MSM...

    [ Parent ]
    he won't (none / 0) (#115)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:17:38 PM EST
    keep the press, I guarantee it. Once the 527's start running the ads, the GOP will force the media to cover it.

    Will the supers dump him somehow? I wonder how many people will actually want to put money on a known loser. I certainly won't donate any money. Why bother when you know someone is going to lose?

    [ Parent ]

    weren't most of Obama's BIG wins (none / 0) (#118)
    by Josey on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:30:02 PM EST
    pre-Wright or pre-WrightII?

    [ Parent ]
    Yes (5.00 / 2) (#119)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:33:24 PM EST
    they were.

    [ Parent ]
    Last big win was three months ago (5.00 / 1) (#122)
    by Cream City on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:53:39 PM EST
    with Wisconsin.  Looong before Wright, and he wouldn not win Wisconsin today.

    NC was big but no surprise, if that's what you mean.

    [ Parent ]

    Rude (5.00 / 6) (#4)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:09:52 PM EST


    Arrogant (none / 0) (#117)
    by Josey on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:25:40 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Since he's supposedly (5.00 / 5) (#7)
    by andgarden on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:11:54 PM EST
    moving forward to the GE, do you think he and his boosters will start talking about THE MATH of the Electoral College? Me neither.

    Lord (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:13:21 PM EST
    don't talk about the EC. He's already losing. I don't see it changing.

    [ Parent ]
    Hubris (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by janarchy on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:12:16 PM EST
    plain and simple.

    And we all know what the gods think of Hubris...

    nah Harmatia (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Salo on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:27:28 PM EST
    it's his flaw.

    Classic arrogant aristocratic prig.  Reminds me of Lord Ranalegh exposing Lola Montez as "Betsy from Donegal" on the West End stage because she turned him down.

    Four years of this could be a pain in the neck.

    [ Parent ]

    And you don't think (5.00 / 4) (#73)
    by janarchy on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:38:37 PM EST
    his harmatia is his hubris? Either way, I suspect Mr. Obama will be undone by his never ending belief that he's above everyone/everything and that no one else deserves time in the spotlight.

    His lack of humility regarding anything never ceases to surprise me. Yes, one ought to have a healthy ego in politics, but it doesn't play well when it's all "Me! Me! Me!" all the time.

    [ Parent ]

    Oops (none / 0) (#77)
    by janarchy on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:41:20 PM EST
    I meant his hubris is his harmatia. Sorry. This is what I for not actually reading my post before pushing the 'post' button!

    [ Parent ]
    Stupid (5.00 / 6) (#9)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:12:33 PM EST
    Obama really really wants to lose the general election if he's the nominee. How many more working class voters will he lose by doing this? Tons I guess.

    BTD, I keep telling you that his problems ARE NOT fixable. Does this stunt make it obvious for you? He will lose the general election.

    I Believe It Shows Once Again, obama Is Full Of (5.00 / 7) (#13)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:14:02 PM EST
    himself and his arrogance knows no bounds.  He is always disrespecting Hillary; and the sad part is so many do not care.  It is all about winning, no matter what the cost.  It looks like obama is going to pay a huge cost in lost voters.

    It's (5.00 / 6) (#19)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:18:09 PM EST
    very Bushian and a complete turnoff to voters.

    [ Parent ]
    If Hillary Crushes Him Tonight (5.00 / 8) (#26)
    by BDB on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:21:49 PM EST
    There's really no way to read that other than as a repudiation of Obama.  Now that the media and Obama himself have essentially declared him the winner, there's no reason for voters to turn out in droves and vote against him.  And racism doesn't explain it.  I can't believe people a few hundred thousand democrats would take the time and turn out to vote against Obama simply to express some racist sentiment.  They can do that in November.

    No, the only way to explain it is that democrats in West Virginia are rejecting Obama as the nominee.  

    If those exit poll numbers are correct, (5.00 / 6) (#79)
    by chancellor on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:42:56 PM EST
    I'd say that the WVa voters are not only giving the shaft to Obama in a big way, they're also letting the world know that they really admire and appreciate Hillary, and that they want her to be the nominee. Seventy-one percent of all women going for Hillary? Any Democratic political advisor or SD who ignores those numbers is ignoring the incredible female voter backlash against the Dems if Hillary is not the nominee.

    [ Parent ]
    The racism defense for losing (5.00 / 2) (#114)
    by Virginian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:17:24 PM EST
    will quickly burn out...if you call everyone who votes against you in a primary a racist...most of them won't vote for you in the GE...not because they are actually racist, but because YOU are!

    I say this time and gain...Obama misplayed his racial trump card...he played it too much, too soon, against the wrong opponent...in attacking Clinton and 50+% of the Democratic base, he has nullified McCain from the charge (boy who cried wolf) AND he's   disenchanted and turned off voters who would normally support him...

    The CW has always been the Democratic party is the inclusive party, and the Republican party is the old white (racist) party...Obama (his campaign) basically said, "No-no, the Democratic party is just as racist...see those racist Clinton supporters! They aren't voting for Clinton, they are voting AGAINST a black man." Thus he's inoculated the Republicans from being the only George Allen party...now both parties are racist, and Democrats can't claim the highroad...why? Because Obama wanted the nomination so badly he pulled out his big gun too early, and used it on the allies...

    [ Parent ]

    Well, the governor (none / 0) (#103)
    by vigkat on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:01:22 PM EST
    earlier stated that this is the first time in 48 years that the voters of WVA have had the chance to participate in a big election where their voices will actually be heard.  That may explain the size of the turn-out.  But I like your rationale better.

    [ Parent ]
    Note this is to be his only speech today (5.00 / 10) (#29)
    by Cream City on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:23:15 PM EST
    according to two networks.  So notch another state won by Clinton about which there will be no concession speech from Obama.  There have been several, and every time shows me that his idea of "new politics" suggests no sense of party (and actually American) political traditions, etc.  

    My parents, one in politics and one an experienced observer, taught me early on to watch how the losers handle themselves as the sign to see whether they would have a future.  It was a good life lesson that how we celebrate wins is predictable (although Obama also often "forgets" to acknowledge others then, another tradition) but that how we handle losses can be predictive and really revealing.  

    So I have watched both Clinton and Obama in their victory/concession speeches quite closely from Iowa forward.  I'm not impressed by his style of "new politics."  Too often, it just comes off as no manners.

    I agree but in fairness (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by bjorn on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:26:30 PM EST
    didn't Clinton forget to congratulate him a few times when he was on the long winning streak?  I thought she should have every time. It is the right thing to do.  Having said that, I think his stunt tonight was dumb.  He should have waited until the state was called and then given his speech and congratulated Clinton.

    [ Parent ]
    That would be the Unity thing to do. (none / 0) (#41)
    by Fabian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:28:12 PM EST
    Talking and walking...
    Talking or walking?

    [ Parent ]
    I have heard her acknowledge him (none / 0) (#123)
    by Cream City on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:56:07 PM EST
    and others, early on, every time she won -- except for the times, of course, when the networks hardly gave her the time of day and cut her off, switched to him because he stepped on her time, etc.

    [ Parent ]
    Sorry -- so what I'm saying is (none / 0) (#124)
    by Cream City on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:58:39 PM EST
    it's possible I missed hearing parts of a speech.

    I get so mad when I think of so many times when and the media have cut her off, again so discourteous -- and so stupid of media, figuring that she doesn't bring in viewers.  I've talked to some in local media who so buy into media spin that they really don't know the data and are surprised by reality when told it.  Or they actually deny it.  Media get to create realities, creative class that they are, not voters.

    [ Parent ]

    It's interesting (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by ahazydelirium on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:25:30 PM EST
    that the exit polls show Hillary doing so well with "change" voters. I feel like previous primaries have given a more substantial edge to Sen. Obama.

    This seems like a normal campaign stop (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by ajain on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:29:05 PM EST
    I dont understand why its being carried by the networks.

    It seems like too much free media for no good reason.

    Wow I fell sleep and missed the convention! (5.00 / 6) (#67)
    by Marvin42 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:36:53 PM EST
    Last I checked no one was the nominee, or anywhere near close to the delegate count!

    What else did I miss? is McCain already president?

    [ Parent ]

    Have no fear! (5.00 / 5) (#76)
    by janarchy on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:40:19 PM EST
    What else did I miss? is McCain already president?

    Don't worry. With stunts like this, he will be very very soon.

    [ Parent ]

    Ha! (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by magisterludi on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:06:35 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Fox didn't carry it while I was watching just now (none / 0) (#75)
    by bridget on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:39:01 PM EST
    both CNN and MSNBC did, however.

    [ Parent ]
    Yep, I wanted news, so I switched to Fox (none / 0) (#125)
    by Cream City on Tue May 13, 2008 at 07:00:11 PM EST
    as he is giving a basic stump speech.  Not news.

    [ Parent ]
    talk about a missed opportunity (5.00 / 8) (#45)
    by aquarian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:29:15 PM EST
    if he doesn't use this moment of undivided attention before the polls close to give a tip of the hat to Senator Clinton and congratulate her on winning the voters of West Virginia.  He could use this moment to tell WV that he realizes that he is not their first choice but that if he is the nominee, he will fight hard for their interests.  Senator Clinton has always been graceful in defeat, and brushed herself off for the next part of the race.  That is why people like her.  Senator Obama would do well to learn from her strengths.

    aquarian, he MISSED his opportunity... (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by NO2WONDERBOY on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:21:47 PM EST
    MADE myself hear him speak. Adonis is a baby in diapers compared to his peacock swirl showing his suit off to the crowd! Even went as far as to say something like don't I look good? touching his brand-new shiny flag-pinned blue suit.
    Arrogance is not enough to describe this.....
    Besides this, he sounded more like an MC at a social event: Give a round of applause to so and so; give it up for so and so....etc. No mention however, of Hillary's win in WV, she doesn't exist. HE WISHES!


    [ Parent ]
    Both CNN and MSNBC are carrying it (5.00 / 7) (#46)
    by joanneleon on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:29:31 PM EST
    and showing the speech in full, right now.  The preempted David Gregory's show for it -- for a campaign speech.

    Can you believe it?

    This reminds me of when they cut off one of Hillary's concession speeches (and it wasn't that long) because Obama started his speech before she finished, and they cut her off and covered his.

    To me, this looks like a purposeful diss to Clinton.

    Not only that, it says something to the people of West Virginia (and Kentucky) that he finds it more important to hold a town hall in Missouri on the day of their primary.

    Not to forget that (5.00 / 5) (#84)
    by Just another person on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:47:00 PM EST
    CNN cut off her Jefferson-Jackson speech to show us a rerun of Michael Moore dissing her on Larry King Live and then proceeded to show Obama's complete speech.

    [ Parent ]
    He is horrible in this speech (5.00 / 6) (#47)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:29:33 PM EST
    He cannot do policy and programs.  Gets all confused.  It's making look goofy.  

    Buyers remorse (5.00 / 6) (#56)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:32:53 PM EST
    Anyone who watched this speech and does not buyer's remorse, is deluding themselves.  

    And whaddya know... (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by Dawn Davenport on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:35:41 PM EST
    ...Donna and Jamal, those impartial CNN panelists, are lauding his speech!

    Jamal's a joke (5.00 / 3) (#90)
    by Just another person on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:48:23 PM EST
    he reminds me of some Obama supporters I speak to who have nothing to say but "hope" and "change" and parrot whatever they've read on CNN.

    [ Parent ]
    Sure to win? (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by Marvin42 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:37:46 PM EST
    Can you also tell me stock futures with your time machine?

    Relinquich the stage? (5.00 / 3) (#74)
    by americanincanada on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:38:44 PM EST
    How insulting is that? He has not won anything yet. presumptive? Perhaps. Likely? Maybe.

    But he is not the nominee yet and his arrogance is going to hurt him. I do not believe he can withstand devastating loses in WV, Kentucky and a possible close loss in Oregon. What happens to his precious nomination then?

    Jack cafferty thinks (5.00 / 4) (#82)
    by The Realist on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:44:43 PM EST
    that we don't want to vote for Obama because our candidate did not win.

    This is the problem. It is not because our candidate might lose tha t we will not vot for Obama. It is everything else.

    IDIOT!

    Good, so those us leaving the party (5.00 / 5) (#93)
    by Marvin42 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:50:12 PM EST
    Don't have to. Whew!

    [ Parent ]
    I am consistently amazed (5.00 / 1) (#95)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:52:19 PM EST
    that this guy gets as much serious attention as he does.
    he is a complete reactionary whack job idiot.
    I have never heard him utter a cogent thought.

    [ Parent ]
    Is that an order? (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by The Realist on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:54:15 PM EST
    I am a Democrat and i have several options, none of which require that i vote for McCain.

    [ Parent ]
    When did (5.00 / 2) (#98)
    by Fabian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:55:22 PM EST
    "Democrat" come to mean "loyal drone"?

    [ Parent ]
    The instant you mix the cool-aid with water (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by Marvin42 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:58:37 PM EST
    And chug dammit, chug!!!

    [ Parent ]
    Look, we were told (5.00 / 3) (#113)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:15:15 PM EST
    the power is with you guys.  So, for every one of us who does not vote for him or does not vote, go out and bust a gut and get three voters.  Off you go.  Gonna be a busy summer.  Yep.  

    [ Parent ]
    O.K. Brazile is on. (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by The Realist on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:47:07 PM EST
    Is American Idol on, yet?

    I'm not watching it.. (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by BostonIndependent on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:50:39 PM EST
    I'm sure that if Obama actually says something new .. it will be all over the media next couple of days. I doubt that will happen.

    As to this being a bone-headed move.. I don't know. I'm actually past caring. It seems quite typical of the kind of Obama campaign move that I've come to expect -- designed to give all the MSM talking heads something to ooh and ahh about.. instead of talking about Hillary's win rest of tonight. It's petty and meaningless, but wonderfully cognizant of the media cycle/circus.

    Alex Castellanos scum (5.00 / 2) (#96)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:52:57 PM EST
    Caffery, what is his purpose other than looking like a drunk codger.

    Castllano just said Obama would have to hire a food tester.  What is this country turning into when they let those people do political commentary.  

    He Is Scum (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by BDB on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:57:52 PM EST
    That Castellanos, racist and sexist bigot, gets to be a commentator on CNN tells you all you need to know about our so-called liberal media.  If they had any core values or common decency, he wouldn't be allowed within a 100 yards of a CNN studio, much less on camera.

    [ Parent ]
    Sen. Obama is playing defense. (5.00 / 3) (#102)
    by wurman on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:01:19 PM EST
    It seems to not make sense because the Obama campaign aggressively & rudely asserts that the candidate has a clear lead, is winning & will win.  Then Sen. Obama steps into what looks like a defensive, fall-back position.

    Sen. Clinton is on the attack, campaigning in each state, every venue & fighting for delegates on every possible front.  Her aggressive moves set the tone for the argument & it seems to have flummoxified the opposition.

    Many commenters seem astounded at Sen. Obama's behavior.  And it seems silly.  If all he did was contest her in one county in WV & earn a 3 to 3 split of the delegates, that matters--compared to a 4 to 1 or 5 to 1 blowout.  Each delegate does matter, whether it's getting 1 up or denying Sen. Clinton 1 down.

    It may also be possible that the Obama campaign is aware that they cannot hit the magical, mystical, mystery number before the convention.  So they pull back & re-assign resources, knowing that no amount of effort will change the actual result.  And Sen. Obama then feigns a "what? me worry?" air of boredom with the process.

    Some reasonable folks think it may be too late for Sen. Clinton.  But Sen. Obama does not have it locked down.  If it goes to the floor of the convention, a lead built on the endorsements of superdelegates can evaporate in roll call votes.

    It actually appears as if Sen. Obama, & his staff, can't seem to figure out an end-game for their initial strategy.  It looks more & more as if the caucuses & primary elections will end up in a virtual tie, thus no resolution, and they were not prepared for that.  And, in a way, it seems as if they are astounded that their repeated claims that the race is over don't seem to end the battle.  Sen. Clinton campaigns on.

    I also wonder if they may literally not actually know how a convention floor battle will play out.

    "Likely nominee:" reminds me of being a little bit pregnant or almost dead.

    damn! (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by The Realist on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:05:45 PM EST
    I wish i could write with that kind of clarity.

    [ Parent ]
    More like stupid politics (5.00 / 3) (#104)
    by tree on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:01:25 PM EST
    IF he's won the nomination then he still has to win the Presidency and he needs to appeal to Clinton's voters if he wants to do that. Someone's advice upthread was good. Congratulate Hillary, say that although he didn't win their votes in the primary he'll work hard to win them in the general. Spread a little unity shtick. At least PRETEND to care, if he can't bring himself to really care. Don't ignore the voters unless you want them to ignore you.

    This is a non-issue. (none / 0) (#23)
    by AdamSmithsHand on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:19:48 PM EST
    He's making a tactical move.  Imagine that.

    a bad move is my argument (5.00 / 5) (#31)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:23:48 PM EST
    But Obama walks on water for some of you.

    [ Parent ]
    Is there some unwritten rule (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Lil on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:31:48 PM EST
    that a loser should not speak in a losing state. If he's reaching out to white voters, why not show courage and do it in WV?  I am not bashing Obama's courage here; I am asking would it help a candidate to make the kind of speech he is making in a state they lost? Maybe not?

    [ Parent ]
    Disagree, he should be making tactical moves (5.00 / 4) (#32)
    by Marvin42 on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:24:13 PM EST
    that are for the GE. For example he could have put on a full press court in WV, knowing he would lose, but would probably help him a lot in the GE. A loss is a loss, but he can't seem to plan beyond the convention imo.

    [ Parent ]
    Yup. (5.00 / 7) (#36)
    by Fabian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:25:53 PM EST
    Me! Me!  Look at ME!
    Don't look at her.  Don't report on her.  Get that media spotlight over here, where it belongs!

    Now if he had anything substantial to talk about or perhaps even comment on how Clinton's poll results are good for all Democrats and the Democratic party - I might be able to go for that.

    But knowing Obama - fat. freaking. chance.

    [ Parent ]

    Substance? (5.00 / 4) (#51)
    by americanincanada on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:30:10 PM EST
    He has now totally ripped off Hillary's healthcare rhetoric. Is anyone watching this? It sounds like he is giving HER stump speech, with the occasional "change" and "hope" mixed in.

    This was a bad, bad move. it makes him look petty and dismissive.

    [ Parent ]

    People need their daily dose (none / 0) (#65)
    by Fabian on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:36:35 PM EST
    of inspiration.
    They need to know that Obama has not forsaken them.

    Of course, Obama needs to grab every media cycle he can.

    [ Parent ]

    Yes, I watched it (none / 0) (#99)
    by vigkat on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:57:48 PM EST
    He also dissed her gas tax holiday, calling it a gimmick.  I've heard this speech before.  Standard issue.  You gotta wonder why he is giving it today before a small crowd in Missouri.

    Oh, we're returning to the scene of Obama's town hall to see someone ask Obama whether Hillary will be his running mate.  He's essentially saying "nah, not really," but is actually saying it's just too soon to say.  Punkinhead is pleased with the answer.

    [ Parent ]

    I agree (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by stillife on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:34:23 PM EST
    He's trying to take the focus off WV and her big win.  Maybe it'll be a really loooong speech in hopes of delaying the networks calling election results.

    [ Parent ]
    Is this an unwritten rule/custom? n/t (none / 0) (#27)
    by rilkefan on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:22:04 PM EST


    BTD or anyone (none / 0) (#28)
    by bjorn on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:22:38 PM EST
    Are these huge margin states the reason Obama has that un-passable lead in pledged delegates or is that about the caucus states or both?

    yes. (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Salo on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:33:08 PM EST
    I think the Obama balance from idaho and Alaska = the balance total from Penn, New Mexico, Arizona, Ohio etc.

    It's prtty humourous really.  The entire difference probably amounts to a few blow outs in caucus states.


    [ Parent ]

    how sad, and it does seem (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by bjorn on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:44:18 PM EST
    unfair, but I guess them was the roolz! I wish we could start over.

    [ Parent ]
    The superdelegates put their head in the sand (5.00 / 1) (#109)
    by Prabhata on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:09:05 PM EST
    Anybody who wants to see why BO has the delegates can see it.  Anybody who wants to know why Democrats have lost (except Carter and BC) only need to know how the delegate apportionment is skewed to give the nomination to candidates that do not carry the blue collar white voters.  Yes, the Democrats have another loser if the delegates continue to go for BO.

    [ Parent ]
    When you say the likely result (none / 0) (#43)
    by Lil on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:29:04 PM EST
    will be bad for Obama, does that mean turnout was very high? If you know.  I thought the % was only important in relation to the actual amount.

    Turnout was extremely high (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by Prabhata on Tue May 13, 2008 at 06:10:37 PM EST
    According to officials in WV, in 2004 the turnout was 30 percent.  Today it was 60 percent.

    [ Parent ]
    This is a boring speech (none / 0) (#50)
    by DJ on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:30:06 PM EST
    and I love how excited the people behind him look!

    snark

    Theme of change into specific policy... (none / 0) (#53)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:31:39 PM EST
    copy all of Hillary's policies with a very weak leader.  

    That is so true! (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by ajain on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:37:24 PM EST
    That is exactly what I was thinking. I mean that was  so totally ripped out of a Hillary Clinton stump speech. This is annoying.

    [ Parent ]
    Cumo...unity talk (none / 0) (#83)
    by Stellaaa on Tue May 13, 2008 at 05:46:26 PM EST
    Now watch the panelists go into apoplexy.