home

There Will Be An Election In November

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:26:01 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg This!! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

This may come as a surprise to some people, but there will be an election in November. To read some blogs, you would think that Barack Obama's almost certain victory over Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination means Obama advances straight to the White House. In case they did not know, it does not work that way.

One blogger says that it is silly to discuss Obama's failure to connect with white working class voters because:

Demographic and socio-economic differences between the two states,* plus the effects of Clinton’s ugly “kitchen sink” campaign, are not considered. [*For example, 31.7 percent of Virginians have college degrees, while 23.4 percent of North Carolinians have college degrees. Obama tends to do better among college-educated voters.]

I am curious if the blogger expects those voters without college degrees to suddenly get them by November and thus solve Obama's problem here. But I especially wonder if the blogger expects that Republicans will not campaign against Barack Obama. Or if they do, whether their campaign will be so much nicer than the Clinton campaign.

The reality based community? Not so much. Not anymore.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only.

< How Bad Was Mark Penn? | VoteBoth >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    There Will Be An Election In November | 245 comments (245 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    A win based on the back of a matchbook! (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by Cream City on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:29:57 AM EST
    That's it.  That's the plan:

    I am curious if the blogger expects those voters without college degrees to suddenly get them by November and thus solve Obama's problem here.

    Watch for Obama's campaign to be handing out matchbooks advertising those mail-order degrees, so that everyone can finish college this summer and graduate in August and suddenly become Obama voters by November.

    Makes as much sense as anything we've seen in this campaign.  

    What you have Paper but got stupid on the 'Net? (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Ellie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:37:50 AM EST
    I love the self-elevating flattery from the Oboiz that they're voting smart and bigotry-free for Obama and Why Won't The B!tch Quit!

    Hey, I'm not the one who mistook that sexist spew about HRC tossing the kitchen sink and hurling china as Obama's foreign policy platform.

    [ Parent ]

    Yeah baby! (5.00 / 2) (#173)
    by Steve M on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:09:04 PM EST
    We can call it the University of Phoenix Strategy.  Onward to November!

    [ Parent ]
    I'm actually IN the "Creative Class"! (5.00 / 2) (#192)
    by otherlisa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 01:02:17 PM EST
    I work for teh MOVIES, you know!

    But, child of divorce, saw that one's standard of living could change in a heartbeat and it wasn't necessarily anything I could personally control.

    Maybe those sorts of real life experiences explain why some of us "high information" voters appreciate a candidate with a grasp of issues and policy and the ability to follow through.

    [ Parent ]

    Naw (none / 0) (#8)
    by cmugirl on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:34:54 AM EST
    Those without college degrees probably are thinking like Obama - this is it- they probably are too stupid to realize that there is an election in November, so they won't be voting anyways. Maybe that's what Axelrod and Brazile meant when they said they don't need them - they aren't voting!

    [ Parent ]
    question... (none / 0) (#12)
    by Stellaaa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:38:10 AM EST
    Are they now claiming they can garner all the college edumacated voters, the Indie and Repub?  That's a leap if they are.  Do they get it?   They got all the college educated people that tend to vote for Obama and all the AA's .  

    [ Parent ]
    I have a college degree (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by BarnBabe on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:46:07 AM EST
    I have a white collar job. I enjoy classical music and rock. I enjoy art and museums. I enjoy history and business. I have a Ameritrade account. But I am also a over 45 average white woman. And Catholic to boot. So, I guess the college degree and intellect do not count if you voted for Hillary. Then I am the AWW.

    [ Parent ]
    I Don't Fit (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Athena on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:48:41 AM EST
    I've actually had to defend my support for Hillary because of my advanced degrees.  I guess I appear to be too smart to support her.  LOL.

    [ Parent ]
    Underevolved (none / 0) (#60)
    by Athena on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:54:32 AM EST
    And to add - the reaction of those I work with is that one mus be crude and underevolved not to recognize the greatness of The One.  Which only makes me stand firm and fight back.

    [ Parent ]
    You've described me (none / 0) (#80)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:03:09 AM EST
    except scratch the Catholic part.  

    And I can see the forest for the trees, just like you.

    Something tells me I'm going to really hate being right.

    [ Parent ]

    I should mention (5.00 / 2) (#96)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:12:38 AM EST
    that I was a welfare brat a and a foster child, so I know that there's more to survival than hopey-changey.

    Obama is running his campaign for those who've never had to really struggle, the self-actualizers.  That isn't the Democratic Core, that's more the Republican core.

    [ Parent ]

    Same here (none / 0) (#89)
    by janarchy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:07:25 AM EST
    only I have a Master's degree and am a Jew. I never knew I was so low-information, racist, stupid etc. until this past year. The things you learn!

    [ Parent ]
    Come me in (none / 0) (#162)
    by mikeyleigh on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:00:02 PM EST
    since I have advanced degrees in history and my Jewish wife is a professor of English at an eastern PA university.  And like so many Hillary voters, I never knew before this year just how ignorant, racist, and I might add, how immune to Kool-Aid I truly am.

    [ Parent ]
    Hey that's (none / 0) (#167)
    by mikeyleigh on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:03:30 PM EST
    supposed to be Count me in.  Maybe I am as dumb as the Obamans say.

    [ Parent ]
    Worse than that (none / 0) (#179)
    by BarnBabe on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:18:45 PM EST
    I didn't notice the spelling error. The brain read it right though so I am ok. Heh.

    [ Parent ]
    Bad Catholic (none / 0) (#182)
    by BarnBabe on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:21:12 PM EST
    I am one of those Pro Choice Catholics who question the whole thing and they rarely rarely see me in church. But if I am there, I know what to do.

    [ Parent ]
    On its best day, the McCain Campaign (5.00 / 7) (#2)
    by andgarden on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:30:05 AM EST
    will not be as nice as Clinton's was on its worst day.

    Sometimes you wonder if these people were born yesterday.

    Some of the voters were (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by BarnBabe on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:46:57 AM EST
    N/T

    [ Parent ]
    On it's best day, the McCain campaign (none / 0) (#13)
    by jimotto on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:38:10 AM EST
    will not be as competent as the Clinton's campaign on its worst day.

    [ Parent ]
    Please see (5.00 / 2) (#20)
    by cmugirl on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:41:30 AM EST
    Karl Rove

    [ Parent ]
    Republicans Are Horrible At Governing (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:48:42 AM EST
    but they have campaigning at the national level down to a science.

    For the past two presidential cycles I heard nothing but overconfidence on the part of Democrats. No way Bush can win was the mantra in 2000 and 2004. No matter how it did it, Bush was sworn into office both times.  

    [ Parent ]

    All those things that were SO OFF LIMITS (none / 0) (#157)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:56:48 AM EST
    for Clinton to discuss during the primary, will suddenly become valid campaign issues in the general. Selective memory by the Obama blogs and supporters want to ignore the fact that even a extremely aggressive McCain campaign will be mild in comparison to what the Republican 527s have in store for Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    Mo Blue (none / 0) (#203)
    by DFLer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:16:28 PM EST
    I don't understand your post. Could you expand, please?

    like: what was off limits, INYO? race stuff?
    more on "selective memory" also, if you don't mind.

    Signed,
    Mo Dense

    [ Parent ]

    No worries!! Obama will win (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by rooge04 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:31:00 AM EST
    with his coalition of rich, educated white folks and African Americans.  Hispanics, white-working class voters and their ilk are not necessary. Just ask Donna!

    Yup (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by nell on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:51:26 AM EST
    go to noquarter. They has an email exchange between Donna and a woman named Alice, which ends with Donna writing "Message to the base: stay home."

    [ Parent ]
    yep, the rest of us are fired (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by DandyTIger on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:51:28 AM EST
    from the new Democratic party. Hmm, I guess we could just go start our own party. Let's call it the old Democratic party. Wonder if we could get Clinton to run for president in our party. :-)

    [ Parent ]
    What could go wrong? (none / 0) (#218)
    by lambert on Thu May 08, 2008 at 09:07:14 PM EST
    Yeah, that one always gets a laugh...

    [ Parent ]
    Of course (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by janarchy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:31:48 AM EST
    the Republicans are going to be nicer. It's only that mean old white lady who means to win at any cost who doesn't know that everyone is supposed to be nice to Obama. /snark

    That's part of my frustration with the Obama camp in general. There's been so much whining and finger pointing whenever anyone is critical of him -- are they all that naive and/or delusional that they think the Republicans won't make mince meat of him? The previous examples of Gore, Kerry, Ford and Cleland (for a start) seem to mean nothing and they were (in my own opinion) far better candidates for their offices than Obama ever could me.

    If the Republicans were not afraid to eviscerate a triple amputee war veteran, they won't be afraid of Obama, even if McCain keeps saying he wants to be above the fray. It won't stop the 527s. It already has started. And if they think that the Republicans are going to treat Obama with kid gloves because he's black, they've got another thing coming.

    It's going to be very very ugly very very fast.

    Oh my God... (none / 0) (#197)
    by ByronOfNewJersey on Thu May 08, 2008 at 01:44:19 PM EST
    ...I think I died and went to heaven...on the internet!  I agree with all of you, just couldn't find the best place to start.

    I'm half-white/black
    I started out as an Obama supporter.
    I didn't fall for Hope/Change...any real Democrat knows we have to beat the Repugnant ones completely out of any office, at the local, state and fed levels.
    I'm so happy to see how many people see what I see: The general ignorance of the Obama voter.
    Every last one of them thinks, not only is it over now, not only is there no need for a Presidential election, but they seem to think that even if he is elected, thats it, its all over.  

    They obviously don't even know about the 3 branches of government, which includes congress.
    Why are they acting this way?
    Also, is anyone surpised that Mr.High and Mighty has not pushed to have  Fl and Mi's votes counted?  
    Its true, MI did it to themselves, but in both cases, its the DNC/RNC rules that are disenfranchising the voters.   Shouldn't he be taking the high road, and calling on both committees to count the votes?

    [ Parent ]

    Welcome (none / 0) (#213)
    by janarchy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:13:04 PM EST
    I know exactly how you feel. I'm sure many others here do too. It's a good place to double check that reality you know hasn't up and died after all.

    The sad thing is people I know who are not Net-based feel the same way. They're not happy. They can see through the (would-be) Emperor's New Clothes and don't understand how the main stream media is seeing things in an entirely different light.

    I can't even talk to friends of mine anymore because they've drunk the Kool-Aid and their ideas about 'facts' and 'policy' are just rhetoric. The level of disdain and elitism from the other side is mind-blowing and they really dont have an f'ing clue. Pretty words and cheap sentiment aren't going to win this election. But somehow they think it's already won...

    [ Parent ]

    Grab a pitchfork, Byron! (none / 0) (#214)
    by bodhcatha on Thu May 08, 2008 at 06:18:27 PM EST
    You are among friends, welcome.

    [ Parent ]
    Obama's primary win (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Stellaaa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:32:03 AM EST
    What they don't get was that it was not a win.  It was a strategic maneuver within the Democratic party parameters.  
    1.  Took away with the race card game the AA voters.
    2.  The Caucus Strategy.  
    3.  Shutting out Fl and Mi took away Hillary big state momentum.
    4.  If you looked at the numbers, it was a squeeker.
    5.  He never got above X % on the white vote.
    6.  The Dem primary rules were played, and played well, that does not translate into a GE win.  
    7.  His race transcended and unity guy has been broken.  


    The caucuses, esp. (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by MarkL on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:33:41 AM EST
    WA state is the example which proves that Obama's caucus victories cannot be taken as representative of the voters' actual preferences.

    [ Parent ]
    Sham (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Stellaaa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:35:40 AM EST
    Playing the Dem primary win game does not translate to GE win.

    [ Parent ]
    he hacked the system (5.00 / 2) (#71)
    by DandyTIger on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:57:31 AM EST
    There was a good analysis I referenced some time ago that showed how Obama hacked the system. He found a flaw in the democratic primary process whereby he could win all the republican states and really nothing much that would be needed in the general, and of course hacked the caucus system in a way it wasn't designed for. Very clever indeed. But it will be a hollow victory precisely because he didn't win democrats or their base, but instead won with people that either won't vote, won't vote for him, or don't add up to much of a sizable voting block.

    [ Parent ]
    I bet they wish (5.00 / 6) (#10)
    by Step Beyond on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:36:07 AM EST
    they could take away Florida's general election vote as well. If only they could find some rule to hide behind.

    no (5.00 / 7) (#14)
    by po on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:39:08 AM EST
    that's the Supreme Court of the US' job.

    [ Parent ]
    yep (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by inclusiveheart on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:40:32 AM EST
    Tons of people talking like winning a closely contested primary counts as a general election win.

    Only a handful of people will even admit that McCain and the GOP will be formidable opponents in the general election.

    It is like the experience of the past eight years suddenly evaporated in people's minds.  They are going to befriend Republicans, sing kumbaya and Obama is going to be the happy hopey pied piper that leads the snakes out of DC or something along those lines.

    Fantasy is "funner" than reality I guess.

    Thing is that I'd like to win and that will require a bit more reality to be thrown into the mix.

    Here's a thought experiment: (none / 0) (#23)
    by MarkL on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:42:24 AM EST
    Who do you think is the better candidate for the GE, McCain or Bush? Isn't McCain far superior in all aspects except for his age?
    Yet Bush won twice. McCain should be considered a large favorite in November, especially against Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    It will be tough for either of our candidates. (5.00 / 3) (#111)
    by inclusiveheart on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:18:51 AM EST
    The issue I have is that the Clinton camp seems to understand that fact far better than the Obama camp does.

    It is all about being realistic.  The Obama devotes have no capacity to understand why anyone wouldn't be automatically in love with their candidate which is why the accusations of racism roll so easily off their tongues and those overly simplistic answers to complex questions handicaps them where it comes to actually solving the problems their candidate has.  They just write people off.

    Clinton, on the other hand, has had to work for her support in a way that I just don't think Obama really ever has.  She seems to understand that votes are earned.  In my mind, that gives her a real advantage Obama hasn't thus far proven he offers.  The latest declaring victory idea is emblematic of the Obama camp's arrogance - which seems to be getting worse - not better.

    [ Parent ]

    That's (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:34:48 AM EST
    a point I keep making too. McCain has way more appeal than Bush ever did. He is plain spoken, doesn't come off as arrogant and a certified war hero. Even most Dems concede that if he had been the nominee in 2000, Gore would have lost in a landslide. Of course, the GOP screwed us over there by nominating a complete idiot and then the MSM pushed him. Ugh.

    [ Parent ]
    And the thing is (5.00 / 3) (#143)
    by janarchy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:42:09 AM EST
    I can see his appeal. I watched him again on Jon Stewart last night and he's....nice. Affable, capable of laughing at himself, comes over as a mild-mannered older uncle/grandfatherly type who seems to know what he's talking about. His policies, of course, are anathema to most of us here, but the people who are being ignored/derided by the current "Democrats" don't care that much. They are more conservative, more middle of the road and they want someone they can relate to who listens to them rather than just ignores them or worse looks down his nose and mocks them.

    If I didn't know as much as I know about McCain, I'd seriously consider voting for him too.

    [ Parent ]

    The way (5.00 / 1) (#180)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:20:36 PM EST
    I see it is that McCain may have no economic appeal to these voters but neither does Obama. That being said, I'm willing to bet these same voters are the ones that give McCain strong numbers on national security and will therefore vote for him based on that issue alone.

    [ Parent ]
    You can vote Independent (none / 0) (#208)
    by MichaelGale on Thu May 08, 2008 at 05:25:10 PM EST
    and vote for Democratic candidates for local and state.  If the Democrats win the Senate and increase the House, they have the power even if it is MCain.

    [ Parent ]
    Oh I know (none / 0) (#215)
    by janarchy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 07:02:33 PM EST
    and I probably will. At this point, I will be voting Dem and/or Indy down ticket and no one for President unless there's a 3rd party candidate who I can feel good about wasting a vote on like Gravel. I dont know if I can actually write-in Hillary in New York State. It's just that like him or not, I can see McCain's appeal to conservative Democrats and swing voters. At this point, I can't see Obama's appeal at all.

    [ Parent ]
    And the Iran thing is in the news again (none / 0) (#36)
    by DJ on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:47:59 AM EST
    That is going to be a big player in the fall.  

    [ Parent ]
    They hate Clinton (5.00 / 5) (#19)
    by lefty lawyer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:41:18 AM EST
    so much, and think she is so evil, that they can't fathom the notion that the Republicans will be worse.

    It's more facile than you think.  Remember, "Clinton's not a Democrat."  So I guess that makes her a Republican.  And so is McCain.  So they're the same.  So whatever she dished out to Obama will be done precisely the same way by McCain, with the same results.

    Starry-eyed, naive creative class triumphalism.  Yeesh.  This campaign has yet to start and already they know the outcome.  Those must be some mighty powerful Magic 8-balls they're working with.

    Looks like us bitter Clinton dead-enders are going to have to do the dirty work and the heavy lifting in this campaign, 'cause it looks like the Obama folks are too busy polishing up their resumes.  Campaign?  What campaign?  Didn't we already win?

    Sigh.

    I don't think it is that personal (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by cawaltz on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:47:22 AM EST
    I think that the campaign cycle was all about the GOP "winning at all costs strategy." Only problem is that WE aren't members of the GOP. We aren't used to marching in lockstep. This is going to backfire big time. As someone said there is no amount of time that will heal people being called racists or being told that their demographic isn't nearly as important as another. I hope I'm wrong but I'm bettng I'm not. In 4 years time the Dem party will be lamenting the loss of "Clinton Democrats."

    [ Parent ]
    It May Take Years For The Party (5.00 / 3) (#171)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:06:39 PM EST
    to get back the "Clinton Dems." Somehow they think their new coalition can make up for this. IMO this coalition can only work in the primaries and only if you run a minority candidate that gets 90% of their own demographic group. Don't see how it works in the general when each minority because a small faction of the population.

    [ Parent ]
    I think they will be be back to (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by FlaDemFem on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:54:05 PM EST
    the "Clinton Dems" in December. They will be looking at the dismembered, eviscerated and probably catatonic candidate they foisted on the Democratic Party and wishing they had gone with someone who knew how to fight and win instead of orate and crumble. Then they can resign and we can get some Dem leaders that care about winning elections more than they care about paying off old scores. Of course, we will have 4 years of McCain to get through first. But I am sure that if there is still a country here in 2012, Hillary will still be here to clean up the mess.

    [ Parent ]
    Attitude (5.00 / 3) (#153)
    by pixelpusher on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:51:18 AM EST
    This attitude can only come from the children of a generation that was born on third base and thought it hit a triple.

    They used to say that about George W. Bush, but these people have attitudes consistent with a generation that was raised since infancy in a culture bankrolled by easy credit and the illusion of wealth.  

    Yo!  Having a college degree doesn't actually make you more intelligent, boys and girls.  It only gives you a ticket out of a waitressing job (although, increasingly not so much).  I've got a college degree too, but you don't see me strutting around like the cock of the walk, because I've been out in the real world for 20 years.

    But most of these kids are two or three generations removed from that and they really have swallowed this "college makes you smarter and better and shinier" b.s. hook line and sinker.  Obama just plays into their fantasies of superiority.  It's all just the same old American exceptionalism, it's just clad in a dashiki.

    [ Parent ]

    So smart they can't see BO's speeches are cribbed (none / 0) (#159)
    by Ellie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:58:39 AM EST
    Obama's speeches are like a cheap cut'n'paste term paper he downloaded for five bucks at website.

    Be the change you want to be in the world? Um ...

    [ Parent ]

    Hightower (none / 0) (#204)
    by DFLer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:23:03 PM EST
    "born on third base and thought he hit a triple."

    my favorite quip from Jim Hightower of Texas.

    I like the way you have expanded coverage...interesting thought. Of course, this country is full of wonderful kids walking the talk, as well. Are dashikas making a comeback?

    [ Parent ]

    I thought that was Ann Richards (none / 0) (#206)
    by Nadai on Thu May 08, 2008 at 04:25:06 PM EST
    said about George Bush the First.  Am I wrong?

    [ Parent ]
    yes and no (5.00 / 1) (#217)
    by DFLer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 08:12:30 PM EST
    Wrong about Richards. Right about George the First.

    "At the Democratic National Convention in 1988, Hightower gave the keynote talk where he quipped, "George Bush is the kind of guy who wakes up on third base and thinks he hit a triple."

    [ Parent ]

    So here's a version for George W (none / 0) (#219)
    by DFLer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:47:15 PM EST
    How about:

    " George W never made it past the third inning without being bailed out by the bullpen, and thinks he earned the Cy Young Award"

    (okay..needs some honing!)

    [ Parent ]

    Thanks! (none / 0) (#244)
    by Nadai on Fri May 09, 2008 at 07:17:16 PM EST
    I've always loved both Ann Richards and Jim Hightower.  I bought Hightower's book "There's Nothing in the Middle of the Road but Yellow Stripes and Dead Armadillos" just for the title and loved it.  It's been years since I've read it; I should pull it out again.

    [ Parent ]
    "They" think we'll come back (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by zfran on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:42:19 AM EST
    For a candidate that says he "transcends" race and wants to "change washington" (where have we heard this before), some of his "followers" are vitrialic, mean-spirited and just the opposite of who he says he is. Why should we come back...to once again vote the party..sounds like a communist form of government..we don't care about you but vote for us anyway.

    After everything that has happened (5.00 / 3) (#78)
    by MMW on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:01:55 AM EST
    Drinking the koolaid, is no longer enough. They're main-lining right now. Wait till they start taking the IV drips.

    [ Parent ]
    I'll say it (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by AX10 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:17:51 AM EST
    Obama sounds like Bush when he talks about "changing" Washington.

    [ Parent ]
    Hopey changey (5.00 / 2) (#142)
    by Upstart Crow on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:41:39 AM EST
    If he really wanted to "bring us together", why didn't he get off his fanny and say SOMETHING about the rampant and egregious sexism of this campaign, with Clinton and those who voted for her being called bitches, whores, etc., and suggestions to rape or murder the candidate?

    Wasn't that his golden opportunity to DO something, rather than just SAY something?

    I guess being female isn't in his DNA.

    [ Parent ]

    1916 (5.00 / 8) (#25)
    by DandyTIger on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:44:33 AM EST
    was the last time a democrat won the white house without winning West Virginia. The Obama camp does seem to have their heads in the sand. With the current atmosphere and approach of their campaign, I don't see how Obama could ever win FL, OH, PA, WV and many others. And of course he can't win most the states he won in this primary including NC, SC, GA, etc.

    On top of that, the attitude towards Clinton and her followers, and especially the attitude towards women in general and their issues (e.g., he hasn't decided yet when life starts), I don't see how he wins those voters over. So we have them counting out MI and FL, counting out Clinton's constituents, counting out blue collar workers, and counting out women.

    This is going to be a very sad general election.

    FL, OH, PA, WV - don't matter to Obama (5.00 / 3) (#86)
    by Josey on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:05:32 AM EST
    The primary is about delegates and it doesn't matter which states they represent.

    In the meantime, Obama tries to improve his cred with white blue collar voters by visiting bowling alleys and skating rinks - while making offensive gestures toward Hillary including "brushing her off" the bottom of his shoe. (the crowd laughs and cheers)
    Obama is so intent on demonizing Hillary that he can't see his actions equal Elitism.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama's cool: No FL MI PA but Guam is a lock (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by Ellie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:52:05 AM EST
    He won all those "contests"!!! All those Repugs came out because he Hoped and Changed Them!

    [ Parent ]
    It's a faith-based candidacy (5.00 / 3) (#26)
    by Exeter on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:45:42 AM EST
    Despite clear and overwhealming evidence to the contrary, all the left blogs, and the MSM has FAITH, and nothing more than FAITH, that Obama will win in November.

    With the exception of Wisconsin, he has never shown a significant ability to attract white, working class voters. And this is in the Democratic primaries-- he also has NEVER won a signigicant general election. There is NO evidence-based argument that he can win in November.

    It was that particular part of his candidacy that (5.00 / 3) (#44)
    by cawaltz on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:50:10 AM EST
    made me feel icky. I've had enogh of "fath based."
    The Lord helps those who help themselves. I want adetailed plan that I can evaluate a candidate on, not a platform speech.

    [ Parent ]
    Good term (5.00 / 2) (#88)
    by AnninCA on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:06:54 AM EST
    faith-based.

    I saw from day 1 that the chickens have come home to roost for my generation, in part, because I think a lot of us neglected any type of spiritual path for our kids.  Really.  I do.  Those supporters are so hungry for faith, they will take it from a politician.

    That's a deep need, there, in play.

    However, in the GE, different story.  Most general voters do not look to politicians for inspiration.  LOL*  

    [ Parent ]

    dead right (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by pixelpusher on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:13:22 AM EST
    Those supporters are so hungry for faith, they will take it from a politician.

    You're absolutely right, and I also think I see that impulse most strongly in red-state Democrats who are rabid for Obama.  They have been raised in an atmosphere where the Christian right has been unchecked, that the only thing they've absorbed about politics is that it's about fervor and faith.  Maybe that's why a lot of these red-state Dems appear to have substituted Obama for Jesus in their own politics.

    I am in New York and I know Obama supporters, and while they believe Obama is "self-evident," you don't see that same creepy religious fervor as you do with the red state Dems.  That's possibly because there is no real religious right active in New York State politics.

    [ Parent ]

    Interesting observation (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by AnninCA on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:19:38 AM EST
    I know in my real life, Obama supporters are not nutcases in my circle, anyway.  And they are super-respectful to Hillary supporters.

    A lot of them were conflicted, to be honest.

    But yeah....none of the rabid stuff.

    [ Parent ]

    Actually (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by janarchy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:22:44 AM EST
    I saw from day 1 that the chickens have come home to roost for my generation, in part, because I think a lot of us neglected any type of spiritual path for our kids.  Really.  I do.  Those supporters are so hungry for faith, they will take it from a politician.

    I don't think it's faith at all. I see it as a direct line from all my friends who brought their kids up without any sense of winning and losing, who spoiled them and coddled them and gave in to every little thing without consequence so they believe they're entitled to everything all the time. There's no hard work, there's no struggle, there's no sense of accomplishment. It's going to be a really painful lesson for them in the Fall when Obama loses and they dont get their way. I expect there will be non-stop tantrums but this time, no one's going to give them their toy, no matter how loudly they scream.

    [ Parent ]

    More than tantrums (none / 0) (#145)
    by Upstart Crow on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:45:44 AM EST
    I think it will be more than tantrums. I think we're headed for race riots.

    [ Parent ]
    sadly (none / 0) (#150)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:49:05 AM EST
    I think you are correct

    [ Parent ]
    no (none / 0) (#156)
    by pixelpusher on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:55:58 AM EST
    I hope you're not talking about blacks starting something... that is a bit much.

    What worries me though is the possibility that poor blacks will be worse off than before having put their hopes in this guy, feeling like it's him or nothing... I mean, the race baiting the Obama campaign did with the Mickey Kantor lie was terrible, just terrible, and I think in future months people will see the obvious that that's why his black turnout was so very high in IN and NC.

    That said I do not resent AA's for wanting to support a black man for president; I just don't agree he's a very good candidate.  He's not the best black Democrat they could have found - not even the best black intellectual.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama can't win without Hillary's supporters (5.00 / 4) (#35)
    by Sunshine on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:47:53 AM EST
    and many that say that they will not vote for Obama mean it... We have got to really get behind supporting the Democratic candidates running for congress, senate and governer because we could end up with a split government and to keep some of McCain's Bush projects from going through, we need 60 senators....    

    You need by my count (5.00 / 4) (#63)
    by cawaltz on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:55:45 AM EST
    45. Only 22 are worth anything. The rest will lament that they can't get anything done without a SUPER DUPER majority of less than 90. I swear the Senate Dems have whining down to an art form.

    [ Parent ]
    If Obama's most ardent supporters (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by Practically Lactating on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:48:47 AM EST
    are this horrified over the "kitchen sink," I can only imagine the shrieking when the GOP starts hurling flaming piles of poo at the unity pony.

    Some people need to toughen up or we have no chance at victory in November.

     

    they have their talking points all lined up (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:53:52 AM EST
    it will be all Hillary fault for ever bringing up those unfortunate truths.

    [ Parent ]
    I only have some college experience (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by OxyCon on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:48:52 AM EST
    But even I can figure out that there aren't too many more AA votes left for Obama to grow his strongest base of support. And that this is a severe handicap for him come November, especially considering how well Hillary Clinton did in this primary, even though Obama owned the AA voting block.
    How about the "eggheads"? Are there enough eggheads out there to help Obama beat McCain?

    Maybe the Obama campaign can hand (5.00 / 2) (#45)
    by MarkL on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:50:11 AM EST
    out a few million diplomas by mail in time for the November election.

    [ Parent ]
    I love (5.00 / 2) (#110)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:18:37 AM EST
    Begala's reframing of the 'creative class' meme.

    [ Parent ]
    Nope! (none / 0) (#92)
    by Molly Pitcher on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:08:08 AM EST
    Stevenson lost--he was the egghead with the hole in the sole of the shoe.

    [ Parent ]
    Honestly...why I would not vote for Obama (5.00 / 6) (#42)
    by Stellaaa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:49:38 AM EST
    The cult scares me.  I see the dictatorship they created here on the Net and the MSM.  Giving them power, is a scary thought.  I would rather have McCain.  Say what you want, but I do not want the mob to have power.   Obama is fueled by the mob.  All mobs, wether they are with me or against me scare me.  They really remind me of the Stalinists and the French revolution guys.  Frankly, I don't think they care about democracy or fairness as much as the neocons did.  

    Finally, if the MSM brought us and supported the neocon dictatorship and now they are pushing the "change" dictatorship, I want nothing to do with it.  

    and... (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by Upstart Crow on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:47:57 AM EST
    And the methods are getting increasingly bullying and thuggish.  

    They aren't the change anyone has been waiting for.

    I'm a Jungian.  When you see something strongly expressed, look for the opposite beneath the surface.  "Hope. Change. Unity."  

    [ Parent ]

    stop making me think! (none / 0) (#205)
    by DFLer on Thu May 08, 2008 at 02:36:28 PM EST
    Wow, Jung Crow...what an interesting thought. I have to go research this idea, and think about it. Thanks

    [ Parent ]
    wow (none / 0) (#55)
    by CST on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:53:33 AM EST
    A cult, dictatorship, stalinists????  Last I checked, no one has had their heads cut off yet like in the French Revolution.  Take a deep breath, Stalin killed 20 million Russions, you sure you want to compare excited college kids and overzealous bloggers to THAT?

    [ Parent ]
    Well...I am using my judgement (5.00 / 4) (#67)
    by Stellaaa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:57:04 AM EST
    and I think from what I have seen of this mob, I do not want them in power.  I have a, as Obama says, "DNA" reaction to fanatics.  This set of people is neocons, the liberal version.  Sorry, I don't do fanatics.  

    [ Parent ]
    really good point (5.00 / 4) (#81)
    by DandyTIger on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:03:49 AM EST
    You know, you've hit on something Stellaaa. The scary Obama following we see, and how they treat the core of the democratic party and Clinton and her followers, is rather unsettling. They do remind me of neocons, just with slightly different agendas. But you've got a great point that those sorts of people, even if they might be closer to us in policy directions (don't know for sure of course), they still are a bit scary. I'm not sure I want them in power either.

    [ Parent ]
    Lakoff/netroots (5.00 / 5) (#102)
    by Stellaaa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:13:58 AM EST
    What they did is they picked off the neocon tool box and techniques.  They all got jealous that they kept winning.  They see the world as winners/loser, no gray areas.  They come from hate, what they don't like.  often times rather than true concern.  They demonize the enemy and dehumanize.  I have a real problem with that kind of mentality.  

    [ Parent ]
    they remind me of the French Revolution too (none / 0) (#220)
    by moll on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:06:29 AM EST
    They demonize the enemy and dehumanize.  I have a real problem with that kind of mentality.

    Dehumanization is the real point at which atrocities become possible.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama is not a Liberal (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by santarita on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:22:31 AM EST
    Clinton and he are both centrist but he is definitely centrist-right and she is to the left.  And he is developing his own potent political moneymaking machine, that will equal existing machines.  So, more business as usual but under a new brand.   Why left-leaning blogs have supported him is a mystery.

    [ Parent ]
    ummm (5.00 / 4) (#79)
    by pixelpusher on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:02:22 AM EST
    Do you not know how Stalinism got started?

    The ideas behind it were dreamed up by excited college kids and pamphleteers (the equivalent of today's bloggers).

    Intellectuals think they never, ever have a role in thuggish movements.  But they're the ones who provide the schemes and the sense of moral superiority that the thugs later pick up on.

    Also, disaffected "smart/spiritual people" are the very ones who are the juiciest targets for any cult.  Ask any cult expert.

    [ Parent ]

    Gone too far (none / 0) (#101)
    by CST on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:13:49 AM EST
    I cannot believe you are comparing Obama to Stalin.  This is not Russia.

    Intellectuals often play roles in all movements, thuggish or otherwise.

    Those crazy college kids also helped bring us the civil rights movement, how quickly we forget...

    I don't care if you support Clinton, or even McCain, but try to be rational rather than adopt the extremist language you decry from the other side.

    [ Parent ]

    Clarifying for you (5.00 / 2) (#107)
    by Stellaaa on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:17:37 AM EST
    The problem with the way you are looking at it, is immediately you think Gulags, cleansing etc.  It's not that, it's the mentality of dehumanizing the opposition in the name of the "good" that you are pushing.  The methods and techniques are not the same extremes, but the core purpose is the same.  Dehumanizing your opposition and exaulting your side, never finding fault.

    I personally, love democratic/social/capitalism, sort of messy no one is absolutely right and no one is absolutely wrong.  I can handle messy world.  

    [ Parent ]

    Obama (5.00 / 1) (#140)
    by pixelpusher on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:38:45 AM EST
    Obama is not Stalin.

    Obama is nothing.  But when he's been used up, the same people who have been building up Obamism will build up the next Stalin.  

    Wherever young intellectual white men with a grudge go, only trouble follows.

    "Young intellectual white men with a grudge" = most of the big-time bloggers we know.

    [ Parent ]

    Young Intellectuals (none / 0) (#155)
    by CST on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:54:42 AM EST
    A few things "Young intellectual white men with a grudge" brought us in the past (with some help from other groups as well):

    The Constitution

    The Revolutionary War - A war to be sure, but few people will argue against it today

    The Civil War - The North Side

    Vietnam War Protests

    Civil Rights Marches

    I swear, every election I feel like all of a sudden an education is a bad thing...  Young people are not the enemy here.  We are occasionally misguided, but we aren't a cult, and we don't all think with one mind, and we aren't holding any grudges.  This needs to stop being an "us vs. them" fight - regardless who started it.

    [ Parent ]

    LOl (5.00 / 2) (#160)
    by pixelpusher on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:59:46 AM EST
    Yes, young intellectual white guys are responsible for ALL good things.  It's YOUR COUNTRY, we might as well give it back to you, huh?

    Those same young intellectual white guys were the masterminds of Native American removal and slavery as well.

    And your contention that "young intellectual white guys" brought us the civil rights marches "with some help from other groups" is BEYOND IDIOTIC.  Narcissim without bounds, not to mention historical ignorance.  Words fail me.  

    [ Parent ]

    I just had to laugh too, and the first (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by FlaDemFem on Thu May 08, 2008 at 01:27:17 PM EST
    thought that popped into my head when I read the Civil Rights listing was "Well, I have heard Lyndon Johnson called a lot of things, not all of them nice, but I have NEVER heard him called a "young, intellectual white guy". And he, combined with Martin Luther King's activism, was the one who got the Civil Rights Act passed. LBJ shoved it through Congress, using old-time politics.

    [ Parent ]
    Right (none / 0) (#196)
    by CST on Thu May 08, 2008 at 01:40:26 PM EST
    Because "marching for civil rights" is the same thing as "signing the civil rights bill"....

    [ Parent ]
    For the record (none / 0) (#172)
    by CST on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:08:29 PM EST
    I am not a "young intellectual white guy".

    Also, I am not saying they did ONLY good things.  I am just saying, they did some good things too.  With helps from other groups, yes, obviously they weren't the only ones marching for civil rights, I am just pointing out that they were part of the demographic.  You were demonizing them, so I felt I had to defend, you weren't demonizing the other groups so I didn't mention them.

    [ Parent ]

    um ... (none / 0) (#221)
    by moll on Fri May 09, 2008 at 12:18:09 AM EST
    I feel like all of a sudden an education is a bad thing...

    Nobody ever said an education was a bad thing.

    The problem with intellectuals comes when they are divorced from the real world. Playing intellectual games might be stimulating and fun for the intellectual, but maybe not so much fun for those who actually get stuck with the results if those ideas turn out to be not so good.

    [ Parent ]

    I agree with you. (none / 0) (#116)
    by AX10 on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:22:06 AM EST
    We saw what the right wing mob did for the past 8 years.  The left wing mob will not be much better.
    McCain is something to think about.

    [ Parent ]
    This (5.00 / 2) (#43)
    by Faust on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:50:05 AM EST
    I am curious if the blogger expects those voters without college degrees to suddenly get them by November and thus solve Obama's problem here.

    Made me laugh. I imagined Axelrod having discussions with many university presidents about pushing a special crash course graduation program over the summer so 5 year college students can get their degrees in the fall.

    The Obama degree program (5.00 / 1) (#68)
    by cawaltz on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:57:05 AM EST
    I dont think I want my degree in Unity and Change.

    [ Parent ]
    forget the election (5.00 / 7) (#46)
    by pixelpusher on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:50:42 AM EST
    Does anyone seriously believe Obama can be a successful president?

    I mean, seriously.

    The guy has an unsuitable temperament for the demanding life of the presidency.  He doesn't even like to mix with the press on his campaign plane, for crying out loud.

    Does anyone really believe his electoral "coalition" (read: Fan Club) is going to hold together during a bad recession?  Even the African American voters will be at each others' throats, the poor and the middle class ones, as they realize what a token and sham this guy is.  Can you imagine the Rev. Wright sermons we will hear when poor blacks finally realize the primrose path their middle-class friends and family have led them down?

    Meanwhile, in Collegetown, the professors will still have jobs and the students will be in hock.  The young people, especially, who are so used to having everything handed to them, are going to take a hard fall when they realize that hey, there actually ARE haves and have-nots in this country, not just the "young" and the "old," the "high-information" and "low-information" voters, or the "educated" and the "uneducated"!

    I have no, none, zero confidence in this guy.  He's probably going to retreat to Camp David and tell us all to make sure to study his next book which will "explain" what he's trying to do.  Many of the faithful will study and quote from it as if from Chairman Mao's red book, but more and more people will realize what a bad product they've bought.

    At least he can probably swallow (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by MarkL on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:52:47 AM EST
    a pretzel without choking.

    [ Parent ]
    It seems that more than half of the Democratic (none / 0) (#121)
    by leftygogo on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:25:15 AM EST
    primary voters believe that Obama would be a better president than Clinton according to primary results.

    [ Parent ]
    LOL (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by pixelpusher on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:40:07 AM EST
    and, what, 75% of Americans supported the Iraq war at the outset.  Your point?

    [ Parent ]
    If You Look At The Exit Polls, Clinton Got (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by MO Blue on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:13:34 PM EST
    more votes from Democrats than Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    I want to be around when reality comes (5.00 / 4) (#52)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu May 08, 2008 at 10:52:52 AM EST
    home to roost for the reality based community.

    I'll be watching the GE, the next admin guilt-free (5.00 / 2) (#185)
    by Ellie on Thu May 08, 2008 at 12:26:48 PM EST
    Did my due diligence supporting the party, the blogs, taking back Congress and the Liberal causes that have always been my top priority.

    Watching this train wreck of the Bush / Cheney era, Dem double-dealing and fauxgressive blogger hubris will easily replace those "ripped from the headlines" L&O / CSI reruns I watch when I make dinner.

    No matter what the outcome is, I'm fine with it. In fact, they can more efficiently eat each others' faces off now that I'm out of the picture as their preferred straw (wo)man.

    [ Parent ]

    Ha! (none / 0) (#91)
    by Emma on Thu May 08, 2008 at 11:07:41 AM EST