home

Clinton Dems: Will Obama Fight For Them?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:17:34 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Last night Hillary Clinton said:

"You know, I understand that a lot of people are asking, what does Hillary want? . . . I want the nearly 18 million Americans who voted for me to be respected, to be heard and no longer to be invisible.

Today, Politico reports:

. . . Obama is not, one of his senior advisers assured me Tuesday night, going to spend a lot of time in the next few months wooing Clinton supporters whose feelings may be hurting.

Makes sense to me. Why worry about 18 million voters? So it turns out the Obama campaign has some not too smart people on his campaign too. Expect a swift rebuke from Axelrod over this.

By Big Tent Democrat

Comments closed

< Morning Edition | Weds. Open Thread >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Clinton Dems: Will Obama Fight For Them? | 309 comments (309 topical)
    Don't (5.00 / 13) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:19:49 AM EST
    expect a rebuke from Axelrod on this. He's made the same statement himself about Obama not needing these voters. And we all know Brazille has said the same thing.

    Exactly (5.00 / 12) (#25)
    by angie on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:31:34 AM EST
    Besides, why should those around Obama be any smarter then he is? He thinks the Hillary voters are all bitter people who cling to their guns, religion & antipathy towards people different from himself. He said it himself. Axlerod said he didn't need the white working class, and Donna Brazile told the "base" to stay home. Frankly, I think it is less hypocritical of Obama to pretend he cares now.

    [ Parent ]
    Too little too late. I will never vote for him. (5.00 / 11) (#42)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:36:16 AM EST
     

    [ Parent ]
    What about the college vote? (none / 0) (#211)
    by henry2008 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:19:49 AM EST
    I am wondering of the college students/young vote will come out for him in the fall?

    [ Parent ]
    This is setting up to be (none / 0) (#340)
    by blogtopus on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:45:50 AM EST
    a defeat of historic proportions.

    If he's relying on the youth vote, and rejecting the rest of us?? WTF is he smoking?

    [ Parent ]

    At least not till this attitude exists (none / 0) (#226)
    by TalkRight on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:23:26 AM EST
    Clinton's unwillingness to recognize Obama as the victor only increased the need for Obama to act like a president and not like a doormat. And denying her a vice presidential slot may be a way of doing that


    [ Parent ]
    Time will come (5.00 / 1) (#264)
    by felizarte on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:46:45 AM EST
    when he has to come to her, BEGGING for her help.  For now, she DOESN'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING.  Not a word, not an interview.  And neither her supporters--not even in November.

    [ Parent ]
    Time will come (5.00 / 2) (#266)
    by felizarte on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:47:22 AM EST
    when he has to come to her, BEGGING for her help.  For now, she DOESN'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING.  Not a word, not an interview.  And neither her supporters--not even in November.

    [ Parent ]
    Well (5.00 / 4) (#292)
    by Brookhaven on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:03:51 AM EST
    Barack needs Hillary much more than Hillary needs Barack.  That's pretty obvious.

    [ Parent ]
    He needed four of her votes to get there (5.00 / 2) (#295)
    by fctchekr on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:05:23 AM EST
    It's really a catch 22; he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. Axelrod may be the astroturfing organizer who got him there , but Obama has yet to show us any political savvy on his own, other than gaming elections.

    Clinton is cornering him into addressing her base; it's smart. The Founder of BET is lobbying the Black Caucus for the VEEP spot for her. And we can see factions within the party again defaming her and trying to push her out; it will not go down well with her constituents.  

    [ Parent ]

    maybe but... (1.25 / 4) (#329)
    by vrusimov on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:36:15 AM EST
    he was smart and savvy enough to slam the idiocy of her proposed gas moratorium, which shows just how clueless she is on our foreign oil dependence...she is going to smash OPEC? now that was funny, i laughed the whole day...Obama may be in the stands be she's not even in the ballpark on matters of oil...

    [ Parent ]
    Those that blog do not equal the average voter (none / 0) (#268)
    by samtaylor2 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:48:38 AM EST
    This notion that he would court those that hate him right now doesn't make sense.  Of 17 million voters on either side, only a fraction have these kind of feelings.   Most will come, because like most of us, we thought they were both good candidates.  He now needs to spend his time working on his message vs. mcain.  
    P.S.- I really hope you do vote for him, we need all the votes we can get.

    [ Parent ]
    He needed to construct (5.00 / 3) (#293)
    by pie on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:04:03 AM EST
    his big tent during the primary.  Instead he threw whole groups under the bus.  Those people didn't have to read blogs to realize that.

    May be a little late to repair the damage done, I'm afraid.


    [ Parent ]

    under the bus... (none / 0) (#332)
    by vrusimov on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:39:35 AM EST
    some would argue that she threw the little states under the bus and it contributed handily to her eventual loss...

    [ Parent ]
    have (5.00 / 1) (#294)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:04:36 AM EST
    you seen the exit polls? The average voters have already said, the majority anyway, that they won't vote for Obama or will sit home.

    [ Parent ]
    He's done a lot of damage (5.00 / 2) (#301)
    by txpolitico67 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:08:24 AM EST
    and these same people who don't blog watch Fox News and a lot of their associates are conservative.  And a chunk of those votes were pre-Wright, pre-freaky catholic church.

    so the ones on the blogs are pretty much political junkies, but the average joe and jane hear things.  they are not as low info as axelrod wants to pretend they are.

    [ Parent ]

    MCain's message Right Change, not Wrong Change (5.00 / 3) (#310)
    by fctchekr on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:14:16 AM EST
    McCain is going to run as the anti-Bush; he's running on RIGHT CHANGE, not WRONG CHANGE. I guarantee you there are many moderate Dems who will cross over. While McCain wanted to work with Obama on a bill, Obama abandoned it to join forces with a Dem sponsored bill. That's partisan politics in Washington, the old style partisan politics Obama says he doesn't play. Being that the Republican brand couldn't be much worse, McCain is neck and neck. Impressive.
    Obama and supporters are taking a lot for granted and I think the arrogance (he and his campaign have shown) will ultimately be his doom...

    [ Parent ]
    Wrong. My mother, sister and husband do not (5.00 / 2) (#346)
    by Angel on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:50:14 AM EST
    blog.  They will never vote for him.  

    What is this "we need all the votes we can get" stuff?  Who is we?  Obama supporters?  Sorry Charlie, I put country ahead of party.

    [ Parent ]

    Why would these people (5.00 / 4) (#193)
    by pie on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:15:26 AM EST
    be so shortsighted to even bring this up?  It's not like he won by a huge majority here.  Makes you wonder what the people who didn't bother voting in the primaries are going to do in November.  He's far from a shoo-in.

    Obama will not get the sympathy vote.  That's for sure.

    [ Parent ]

    Bush the third? (5.00 / 1) (#254)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:42:51 AM EST
    His attitude is no different than Bush in 2004. After Ohio, he claimed the "mandate" of the people. I guess life can be any reality you want if you live in a glass bubble. I really expect and hope for more from a leader. There's more to governing than spin.

    [ Parent ]
    Add it's not 18 Million it 's many many more (5.00 / 7) (#240)
    by Salt on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:30:07 AM EST
    That believe Hillary not Obama won this primary based on the real Will of the voters who spoke.  And I can assure you when I move candidates, like many other strong women I take with me many voters so the math needs a multiplier.  And stop with the silly demeaning analysis that were hurt, boo hoo. I'm not, nor am I a victim, nor wanting Hill on an Obama ticket and could care less if the Obama wing of your Party respects me in the morning I do not respect them.  I am however truly disgusted with the Dem Party and my view of the Primary as a scam with faux rules fake delegate distribution, a fraud. And had I known, how delegates are distributed I would not have bothered spending my money or my energy on this race, that's shame on me as a member of the electorate.  I can wait until 2012 no problem, my current priority now is to work to end Pols discretionary spending of our tax revenues and curtail non discretionary legislation and mandates now used to buy supporters versus pols needing to work hard and govern to win their voters and that's where my vote will go this round.

    While my political philosophy may continue to lean Left, or I believe it dose, I know after looking closely at the Dem Party, the Dem Leadership, the Dem Rulz the Dem Rulz Committee, the Diversity make up in the Dem Leadership, I'm not a Dem.


    [ Parent ]

    At least he filed (none / 0) (#338)
    by mg7505 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:45:04 AM EST
    his tax returns so we know how much he's being paid.

    I'm looking forward to the rants from Obamabots when desperation sets in close to November and they see their guy can't win. Of course it will be IACF IACF ad nauseum, but at least I'll be able to laugh about it then.

    [ Parent ]

    huh? (none / 0) (#339)
    by vrusimov on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:45:27 AM EST
    interesting conspiracy theory my friend...you should peddle this to information clearing house or something...they might actually pay you for it...this is the most ridiculous assertion i've heard since the presidential threshold test...keep up the good work though...

    [ Parent ]
    Much easier to sway Republicans (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by Demi Moaned on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:22:30 AM EST
    ... with your message of change.

    www.lobbydelegates.com (5.00 / 3) (#224)
    by janedw420 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:22:05 AM EST
    please let them know there is still time...

    [ Parent ]
    why should the self-proclaimed (5.00 / 11) (#5)
    by cpinva on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:23:22 AM EST
    nominee worry about actual voters, he hasn't so far?

    frankly, i'll wait for the movie in august.

    Not Sure Why You Think They Will Receive A (5.00 / 10) (#6)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:23:36 AM EST
    from Axelrod. IIRC he was on TV stating that the Obama Party doesn't need to rely on the working class to win. We don't need them has been a common theme throughout the primary and reinforced by Brazile and other Obama surrogates (declared and undeclared).

    I think they all said a lot when (none / 0) (#14)
    by TomP on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:28:05 AM EST
    trying to influence superdelegates.  They want those votes and I'm sure they will work for them.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm Not Sure That Obama Will Spend Much (5.00 / 9) (#64)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:41:38 AM EST
    working to get these voters. IMO he will delegate most of wooing of the non-Obama base to Edwards and Clinton. Also, I don't think Obama will be able to woo them.  He is visibly uncomfortable around small town and rural voters and looks like he would rather be anywhere else but in their environment. He IMO has absolutely no understanding or empathy for these folks and it shows.

    [ Parent ]
    He needs both halves of (5.00 / 2) (#95)
    by TomP on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:50:17 AM EST
    the Democratic Party to win.

    Clinton and/or Edwards can help, but people vote for the top of the ticket.  It would be a mistake for him to assume they can deliver voters to him.

    His coalition was barely enough to win the nomination, and might not have done so if there were primaries instead of caucuses in some states.

    Barack Obama has to do it.  Clinton cannot really deliver all those votes.  She can help, yes, but people will make their choice on Obama and McCain.

    One thing, I think the stadium/big crowd/rock star thing hurts him.  Voters over 35 with kids are not looking for that kind of a leader.  

    His speech last night seemed angry.  He looked tired.  He needs to smile more.

    I want him to win.  I sure don't want McCain.

    I think he can win.  His campaign has to see the strengths and weaknesses.  It will take work.  That's why the statement that BTD quotes is so stupid.  Why say that?

    I also think Clinton will do a lot to unify the party.  And I am not sure she wants VP, notwithstanding all the media hype.

    [ Parent ]

    I Agree That Obama Has To Do The Heavy (5.00 / 5) (#208)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:19:24 AM EST
    lifting if he is to win over large portions of the American public. What his campaign fails to realize is that some if not much of the reluctance to vote for Obama has more to do with Obama then it does with Hillary. Also, I think that Obama's campaign has the Democratic disease of thinking that 1) there is no way they can lose and 2) voters will just naturally fall in line and unite behind Obama.

    You see this in every statement from Obama's campaign and from the Dem leadership. They are operating once again under the premise that the voters will finally "GET IT." The fall back position that women voters will naturally vote Democratic because of Roe v Wade is not substantiated by past history. Roe was at risk in 04 and Bush won white women by 55% to 44% and that was without the party politicians dismissing and insulting women.  

    [ Parent ]

    Yes. They have to fight for (none / 0) (#308)
    by TomP on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:12:16 AM EST
    every vote.

    [ Parent ]
    Tom (1.00 / 1) (#330)
    by talex on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:37:26 AM EST
    you were so wrong about Edwards over at dKos and you are more wrong about Obama now.

    [ Parent ]
    you noticed that, too, MO Blue? (5.00 / 5) (#113)
    by kempis on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:54:30 AM EST
    He is visibly uncomfortable around small town and rural voters and looks like he would rather be anywhere else but in their environment. He IMO has absolutely no understanding or empathy for these folks and it shows.

    I've noticed the same thing--picked up the same, tense vibe from him in working class environments. I suppose most of his ardent supporters would be awkward in them, too. (Goodness, are these people racist yahoos! Will they shoot me if I say the wrong thing?) It's similar to the obvious discomfort that some middle class whites exhibit in all-African American environments. It's either "please don't hate me; really, I'm cool!" or "you folks are scary; nice to see ya; gotta run!"

    He needs to work on that.  

    [ Parent ]

    Academics sometimes (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by TomP on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:09:51 AM EST
    are uncomfortable around working people.  he does not to work on that, but I think he can.

    [ Parent ]
    Sure he can (5.00 / 1) (#258)
    by Nadai on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:45:16 AM EST
    He just won't.

    [ Parent ]
    Excuse me, but academics are hard-working (5.00 / 1) (#353)
    by Mark Woods on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 11:05:15 AM EST
    union members, in case we missed something here.  I think you mean elite professionals, but even that isn't right, is it, since many professionals are also hard-working.

    But just because my fellow University teachers take enough bashing as it is, please don't stereotype us, especially lumping Obama's arrogance and hubris in as a characteristic of our group.

    Some of us have also worked in mines & steel mills, driven taxi and worked on farms, while also members of academia . . .

    [ Parent ]

    Whoops. (none / 0) (#177)
    by TomP on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:10:30 AM EST
    "He does need to work on that" is what I meant.

    [ Parent ]
    excuse me? (none / 0) (#230)
    by blcc on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:24:27 AM EST
    Are you suggesting that the Obama camp was trying to sway superdelegates by insisting they would not be pursuing Clinton's voters?  Or are you suggesting the anonymous senior adviser cited in the article was lying?

    Either way, where's your evidence that Obama will be working for Clinton's voters?  Because I'm going to put forth the suggestion that he start by making nicey-nice.  

    It's on HIM.  Not her.

    [ Parent ]

    Typical hubris. (5.00 / 11) (#7)
    by alexei on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:23:39 AM EST
    Along with the Reid, Pelosi and Dean.  So, I guess this is the change we have been promised.  Ignore and vilify 18 million Americans, disenfranchise voters and steal votes.  Looks like the Republican Party to me and I always thought Nader was wrong.

    Same here re Nader...,. (5.00 / 7) (#67)
    by Aqua Blue on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:41:57 AM EST
    The Democratic Party shocked me with the FL/MI deciion to disenfranchise voters.   It's no longer the party that I have loved for a lifetime.

    The arrogance and the disrepect of people from the Obama machine is beyond my understanding.   Seems to me that they are cutting off their noses.

    Looks like I will bevoting for Hillary in 2008.

    [ Parent ]

    "Not Bush" (5.00 / 9) (#106)
    by Mike H on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:53:00 AM EST
    I think that Obama and his people truly believe that all he needs to do to win the generals is wander around not being a Republican, not being Bush.

    That somehow all the traditional Democrats they've disrespected will indeed "fall in line" simply because they've been told to.

    That will likely fail.  Indeed, it will likely fail hard once the media turns on Obama, which they will start to do relatively soon.

    He's gotten SUCH a free ride to this point, it's not even funny.  If I'm wrong, so be it, but I don't see him withstanding the combined GOP and media-driven assault on him that will happen.  He may have to struggle just to get as many states as Kerry did.

    [ Parent ]

    It Really Does seem time (none / 0) (#334)
    by talex on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:41:26 AM EST
    for a whole lot of us to migrate to a Third Party and strengthen it and thereby making our voices respected and heard.

    This was the year when the Democratic Party jumped the shark in so many ways.

    [ Parent ]

    Yes, I saw that also and think it is (5.00 / 3) (#9)
    by TomP on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:24:39 AM EST
    key.  Respect for Clinton voters and supporters.

    you can't fake respect (5.00 / 2) (#157)
    by TeresaInPa on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:06:05 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    well (5.00 / 3) (#174)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:09:35 AM EST
    you might be able to.  but being called low, brow low information, low education, low income, HillaryBilly hick racists and THEN being told you are respected doesnt help the process along.

    [ Parent ]
    Even if Axelrod does rebuke this, (5.00 / 10) (#10)
    by Esme on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:24:47 AM EST
    it's all words. There has been not a single action on the part of the Obama campaign to indicate that they care about Clinton voters. On the contrary, we have been laughed at, smeared as racist, and through under the bus.

    Everyone tells us that we aren't a part of the "new democratic party". Let's see how that works out, shall we?

    That would do it for me. But if the primary (5.00 / 5) (#17)
    by Joelarama on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:29:01 AM EST
    campaign is any guide, I wouldn't expect any wooing to be policy-based.

    [ Parent ]
    Apologies -- the comment above was meant (5.00 / 5) (#27)
    by Joelarama on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:32:31 AM EST
    as a reply to the comment further up suggesting that Obama adopt Hillary's health care proposal.

    I would really reevaluate him if he took that step.  But like I said, he doesn't seem to have the appetite for policy.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama is too arrogant to go that route (5.00 / 2) (#242)
    by TomLincoln on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:32:26 AM EST
    I just do not think he has it in him to say "her universal health care planb is superior to the one I pushed."

    He will see if she can bring her voters along. If she can't he will always let others do the persuading.

    Since I do not believe he is capable of dealing with the problems facing our country, that simply will not be resolved with "just words," I would never support him for president.

    I liked McCain's line that the Dem. leadership gave Obama the nomination. Whether Obama likes it or not, what happened at that RBC meeting last Saturday gives affirmative action a bad name.

    I truly expect Donna Brazille to think of herself as so important that she will not declare until Al Gore does.

    [ Parent ]

    Got gut feeling that a major gaffe is in the wind. (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by Saul on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:24:55 AM EST
    On the Obama side.

    If anything happens or comes out I pray (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by Joelarama on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:36:08 AM EST
    it is before the convention.

    But, then, the Republicans are good at this dirty tricks timing stuff.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama is a walking major gaffe... (5.00 / 9) (#90)
    by p lukasiak on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:48:57 AM EST
    seriously, get him away from a teleprompter for 10 minutes, and you've got a gaffe.

    So the issue isn't whether there will be a gaffe from the Obama campaign -- its how it will be reported.

    And given the way the media works (the campaigns drive the coverage) I expect to see the next few months becoming gaffe-apalooza.  The media decided that Obama was the nominee in February, so paid little attention when the Clinton campaign emphasized Obama's gaffes.  

    But when the McCain puts out an email pointing out an Obama gaffe, it WILL get covered.

    [ Parent ]

    When Obama said repeatedly that he did not (5.00 / 7) (#13)
    by Joelarama on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:27:37 AM EST
    want to re-fight the battles of the 1990s, apparently he also meant he wants to forget the lessons of the 1980s and 1990s.

    Obama needs to start wooing and soothing, pronto.

    suspect he knows many of them (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:29:06 AM EST
    will never vote for him.
    we had major weather last night so the only speech I saw was McCains.  listening to the heads this morning you would think we were talking about american idol.  
    heres a question for Obamans, if you really think giving a very professional speech is the most important part of being elected president, how do you explain W?
    I thought McCain was good last night.  he knows he cant compete with Obama in oratory and he didnt really try.  but he had things to say that people will respond to.
    my favorite line was the one about how he doesnt think he is the person anointed to save the country in its hour of need but was the person who was saved by his country.
    lets see how (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:36:54 AM EST
    the old guy does in November, hum?

    [ Parent ]
    Likely better than most expect (5.00 / 2) (#135)
    by Mike H on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:01:11 AM EST
    I think the Democratic leadership that conspired to aid Obama are going to be dumbfounded by how well McCain does against Obama.

    Should this travesty continue and Obama truly is anointed in August, we will be seeing a McCain inauguration in January, barring a complete McCain meltdown.  A Dem unity ticket might help thwart that scenario, but I honestly don't see that happening.  

    Indeed, I think Obama would be petrified of being upstaged by Clinton as his running mate, since she is still so clearly the better, more experienced, more capable candidate.

    [ Parent ]

    I completely agree, however (none / 0) (#161)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:07:16 AM EST
    so far this cycle I have been consistently and spectacularly wrong at every opportunity so the smart money would be to bet on the opposite of whatever I say.

    [ Parent ]
    Better then slaps in the face (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by angie on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:40:11 AM EST
    that Obama has given us.

    [ Parent ]
    if McCain (5.00 / 3) (#63)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:41:36 AM EST
    picks a formidable, credible woman as VP Obama might as well go home and watch tv for the next few months.


    [ Parent ]
    Senator McCain does not speak with... (5.00 / 2) (#172)
    by NotThatStupid on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:09:18 AM EST
    ... the same facility that Senator Obama does, true.

    But, despite the clumsiness of his speech, I feel he is sincere about what he says - something I do not feel when I listen to Senator Obama.

    Besides, if all we wanted in a President was a speechmaker, shouldn't we be getting our candidates from Toastmasters?

    [ Parent ]

    really (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:13:37 AM EST
    again two words.  George Bush.
    also, McCain may not be a great speechifier but he is very good in debates.  he will eat Obama alive in a debate.


    [ Parent ]
    McCain spin (5.00 / 1) (#212)
    by Valhalla on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:20:03 AM EST
    A bit of MSM spin for McCain that I thought I saw peeking out from under the covers last night:  No, he's not a great orator but it's because he's such a humble guy.  He truly believes in getting things done and does not mind sharing credit.

    Remember a few weeks back folks were saying the same sharing the credit thing about Ted Kennedy and everyone thought it was wonderful?

    I think it has potential to be effective against Obama if they run with it.  It's another thing that distances himself from Bush (goodness knows he doesn't have any humbleness problems) and highlights the eliteness criticism of Obama, which already has a fair amount of traction.

    Or I could be all wrong.  I'm not saying I believe it, and I'm still not voting for McCain, but it was interesting.

    [ Parent ]

    to be clear (5.00 / 2) (#239)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:29:43 AM EST
    I will not vote for McCain.  but I know many who will.

    [ Parent ]
    Yes. (5.00 / 2) (#267)
    by blcc on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:48:15 AM EST
    As a matter of fact, I do.

    Obama should take notes.  I'm Indy now - my vote is up for grabs and if McCain comes courting?  Well let's just say it feels a lot better than the slapping around and name-calling the Obama camp has been dishing out.

    [ Parent ]

    btw (none / 0) (#49)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:38:01 AM EST
    I didnt see the whole thing, my satellite dish was going in and out, so I didnt see the so called pandering part.

    [ Parent ]
    practicing already for the general (none / 0) (#96)
    by hellothere on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:50:25 AM EST
    with mccain put downs?

    [ Parent ]
    McCain better shake up... (none / 0) (#168)
    by ineedalife on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:08:10 AM EST
    his advance team. They had a crowd of zombies that did not recognize his laugh lines. They cheered like Pavlov's dogs at the old standard Republican red meat lines. But they were befuddled by the change rhetoric. I think his smirks were to clue the crowd in when they did not get it.
    It was a well-written speech and the talking heads working from transcripts loved it but it crashed in person. McCain also has to learn that he is not a good enough orator to give a speech for the first time on national television. That speech will mature into a good stump speech for him, but he was squinting at the teleprompters when unfamiliar lines came up. Obama and Clinton can pull it off but McCain has to practice a little.

    [ Parent ]
    enjoyed McCain trying to pander to Hillary support (none / 0) (#354)
    by mm on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 11:05:41 AM EST
    Absolutely.

    Better than getting spit on by my former party's nominee.

    [ Parent ]

    Um (5.00 / 5) (#21)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:30:35 AM EST
    Obama is responsible for this not Clinton. Obama and his campaign have called us names not Clinton. Obama needs to take responsbility and quit blaming Clinton.

    Simple question: How is Obama responsible? (none / 0) (#44)
    by Media Browski on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:36:46 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    We can start (5.00 / 6) (#69)
    by BDB on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:42:50 AM EST
    with pushing the RFK story.  That's a Big Lie, like the ones we've been hearing from Republicans for years, as opposed to the normal political ones.  It's repugnant and was for me the last straw. If I wanted to vote for someone who had Karl Rove's values, I'd vote GOP.

    [ Parent ]
    Funny, I saw it as the last straw (none / 0) (#74)
    by Media Browski on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:45:13 AM EST
    for her chances as VP.  Not because she intended to make the insinuation, although it's obvious that her campaign considered this as a possibility, but because in the week a Kennedy was diagnosed with cancer it showed a remarkable lack of political empathy--the very thing I admired in Bill.

    [ Parent ]
    Simple Answers: He's running to be a Leader (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:48:05 AM EST
    In lieu of real accomplishment, he has presented his slick campaign as leadership cred. He should lead on this, you know, Like He Said.

    [ Parent ]
    simple answer (5.00 / 5) (#86)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:48:08 AM EST
    I don not now and will not differentiate between Obama and his band of rabid supporters who spew venom on the pro Obama blogs.

    I could have if Obama ever came out and denounced them.  I could have if the DNC ever came out and denounced them.  I could have if the dem leadership ever came out and denounced them.

    But, no one did.  So, I consider those blogging supporters to be totally representative of the Obama campaign.  period.

    [ Parent ]

    Simple answers, just some examples: (5.00 / 6) (#94)
    by Joelarama on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:50:15 AM EST
    Running a campaign that labeled a former Democratic vice-presidential candidate, a former Democratic President,two Democratic governors, an entire region of the country (Appalachia), and perhaps half of Democratic voters in the primary as "racists."

    And, for me especially, letting a homophobic preacher take over a campaign event in South Carolina, after being warned, and then refusing to criticize the preacher's words, or apologize.  

    Really, South Carolina says it all:  paint Bill Clinton as a racist, and throw gays under the bus, to solidify Obama's votes in the African American community.

    [ Parent ]

    Because (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:52:28 AM EST
    As the leader of his campaign, he sets the tempo and he decides what happens within it. He knows and approves of their actions or he would have reigned them in. His campaign has been very choreographed from the start.

    [ Parent ]
    Simlle question (5.00 / 5) (#125)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:57:26 AM EST
    Who is responsible for persuading these voters to vote for Obama? Myself, I think that would be Barack Obama.

    [ Parent ]
    Not Obama (5.00 / 2) (#272)
    by chattedort on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:51:23 AM EST
    In fact, it was not Obama who was responsible, it was once again the media that chose him. My main reason for not voting for Obama is the media. Our fight is with the media. They made Obama just like they made Bush. They destroyed Clinton just like they destroyed Gore. If we continue to allow them that power, we are no longer a democracy. My vote is certainly a repudiation of Obama, but most important is the repudiation of the media.

    [ Parent ]
    obama is responsible. (5.00 / 1) (#323)
    by hellothere on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:27:11 AM EST
    he opened pandora's box. he supported his surrogates bashing the clintons. he gave hillary the bird during a speech, so i don't buy that spin ever.

    [ Parent ]
    Here's how Obama is responsible (5.00 / 8) (#147)
    by stxabuela on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:03:32 AM EST
    When Obama brushed off his shoulders and shoes, visually portraying Hillary Clinton as dirt (or worse,) he lost any chance of getting my vote.  It wasn't a supporter nor the media.  It was Obama himself.  

    [ Parent ]
    Obama chose to run a divisive campaign based (5.00 / 8) (#283)
    by esmense on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:00:03 AM EST
    on demographics. A campaign that encouraged and exploited generational, racial, gender, class and regional resentments, misunderstandings, fears, and prejudices. A campaign in which he personally told black Americans that the Clintons had "bamboozled and hoodwinked" them and his surrogates told them that Hillary Clinton was a racist "who never cried for Katrina." A campaign that told young Americans that older Americans were standing in their way and had to be destroyed and defeated, that told young women that older feminist and activist were angry people responsible for the ugliness of the Rovian era of politics, that told men that Clinton was like "everyone's first wife" a "monster" who "would do anything, say anything" to win election, a campaign that told elite Democrats that working class Americans, the party's traditional base, were "bitter" racists whose votes the party no longer wanted or needed, a campaign that explained hispanic support for Clinton solely as racist (and encouraged, while never admitting to, the racism and racial resentment of working class African Americans toward hispanics) etc., etc. A campaign that further, in order to attract Republican and Indpendent votes, catered to Clinton hatred and told those Clinton haters and former Bush voters that Bill Clinton's administration was no better than the Bush administration and equally responsible for the problems we face today.

    These tactics won him the nomination, barely. But they also won him a mess for the general election -- a divided party, millions of voters who feel trashed and betrayed. Plus, he is running as the respresentative of a party that he himself has trashed. He can't even make an argument for returning the Democrats to power based on their good performance last time around -- because he has done everything he could to destroy the reputation of the only successful Democratic administration in half a century.

    Sorry, but that is not a mess that Clinton -- or anyone other than Obama -- can do anything about.

    [ Parent ]

    HRC Didn't Push Me Anywhere (5.00 / 8) (#22)
    by BDB on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:30:52 AM EST
    It's crap like this that has pushed me.  Every time I expected Senator Obama to reach out to voters like me he and his supporters have kicked me in the teeth.  At a certain point you don't really expect anything else.  

    For the record, I started 2007 hoping Barack Obama would get in the race and fully expecting to support him over everyone else.  

    I know Obama takes responsibility for anything and his supporters never hold him accountable for anything.  But that doesn't make this not his fault or his problem.

    Should Read Obama NEVER takes responsibility (5.00 / 4) (#23)
    by BDB on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:31:09 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    The line of thought (5.00 / 3) (#24)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:31:18 AM EST
    is perfectly consistent with how he's been all along.

    That is the reason for the scary coathanger article in the NY Times, etc. We'll come around because we HAVE to come around because of the scary Roe specter.

    LOL!  Where have I heard that before....didn't work so well for Kerry now, did it.  And the Democrats were less divided then.

    Run on that, Obama, please run on that!  

    I am still of reproductive age. (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by MMW on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:44:39 AM EST
    I don't give a rat's behind about Roe versus Wade. I am old enough and comfortable enough where an unplanned pregnancy does not phase me.

    When my daughter is old enough, part of "the talk" will be that I will support her if she ever decides to take that option. I will fly her to a safe place and pay for a safe procedure.

    It has always been my experience that low-income women are less likely to choose an abortion than those with career and higher tax brackets. Therefore those likely to need those services already supported him, ratherthan the candidate who has a history of fighting for their rights. So I'm with you and in the rest of the club that says fight for your own rights.

    Besides, the court is already stacked against most progressive ideas. The justices most likely to retire or die are progressives, not conservatives.

    [ Parent ]

    Rape and incest victims most at risk (none / 0) (#145)
    by janedw420 on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:03:13 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Exactly. Sandra Day O'Connor (none / 0) (#302)
    by BlueMerlin on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 10:08:25 AM EST
    (a REAGAN appointee) was key to keeping Roe intact during her tenure.

    Nothing but fear mongering by Obama.  

    [ Parent ]

    Specifics. please? (5.00 / 4) (#28)
    by Pol C on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:32:32 AM EST
    My current inclination in the GE is not to vote on the Presidential ballot. I won't vote for Republicans and I won't vote for Obama. My antipathy for him is rooted in my observations of his campaign's conduct and my research into him. It's not based on anything Hillary has said or done. I think the nastiest thing she's said about him is that his Commander-in-Chief experience was ranked by hers and McCain's.
    it appears you misunderstood the comment (5.00 / 6) (#93)
    by Josey on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:50:11 AM EST
    Hillary's "nastiest" remark was Obama lacked experience to be CinC.
    Very true - and many Dems will vote for Experience rather than an Experiment.


    [ Parent ]
    Oh come on.... (5.00 / 6) (#162)
    by TimNCGuy on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:07:22 AM EST
    the "white americans" remark came two weeks ago.  You and the Obama camp had her labeled as a racist by the time you got to South Carolina.

    the "as far as I know" remark.  Indeed, how clever of Hillary to make sure Steve Kroft asked her that same question THREE times so she could sneak in that answer on the last go around.  Suppose Kroft had stopped after she answered the first two times with no equivocation at all.  Then her devious plot would never had worked.

    Now, you want the truth...  It is Obama supporters doing exactly what you did in your post...mischaracterize...  that has caused much of the division.

    [ Parent ]

    Hillary's FIRST answer to the question (5.00 / 1) (#252)
    by Josey on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:40:50 AM EST
    of whether Obama was a Muslim was 'NO'!
    But dishonest Obamamites ignored it.


    [ Parent ]
    Obama actually IS inexperienced and uncredentialed (5.00 / 3) (#118)
    by Ellie on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:56:00 AM EST
    Perhaps you can alleviate your anger and confusion (that you claimed to be here to resolve in others) by following my earlier suggestion to read a few days' threads and topic information.

    [ Parent ]
    Obama had been on the national political scene (5.00 / 4) (#276)
    by esmense on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:53:40 AM EST
    for only a little more than a year when he began planning his run for the presidency. The simple fact is that he IS less experienced. Not only less experienced than Clinton and McCain, but less experienced than ANYONE he ran against in the primary and less experienced than anyone who would be considered a "credible" pick for VP on his own ticket.

    Comparing experience and records is what is REQUIRED of candidates running for elections. Comparing experience and records is what is REQUIRED of voters making informed decisions in elections. There is nothing "nasty" about pointing out your opponents lack of experience or highlighting what you believe is your greater experience and record of accomplishment. One would hope most campaigns would stick to these kind of basics rather than running off into the low weeds with character attacks, accusations of racism, etc., like those the Obama campaign used against the Clintons.

    By the way, did it anger you and did you think it was "nasty" when the Obama campaign mocked and devalued Clinton's experience as a first lady and long record as an activist for health care, education, the disabled, legal resources for the poor, etc.?  

    [ Parent ]

    Hurting the Democratic party? (5.00 / 10) (#30)
    by MMW on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:33:04 AM EST
    How old are you?

    Why exactly are you supporting Obama? Give me his strongest stance that you support.

    How has Hillary Clinton hurt the democratic party? By getting more votes? By having more concrete plans? By being more qualified? By fighting for women's rights? By fighting for equal rights?

    What has Obama done that he can point to and say, see what I have accomplished?

    It took the entire media, pundit class, and DNC to shove him over the finish line. What exactly has he accomplished?

    The true racism, is expecting so little from a black man.

    Why does my age matter? (1.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Media Browski on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:43:02 AM EST
    How? By micro-targetting racism and intentionally dividing the party.

    Why am I supporting him? In addition to actually liking his policies on many issues (which, frankly, differ little from HRC's) including student loans, health care, trade and infrastructure, I find his dedication to getting us away from the era of polarization to be rather healthy.

    What has Obama done?  Created a movement, for starters.  

    You see him as being helped over the finish line, I see him as having defeated the party favorite, the inevitable opponent who came armed with all the contacts, name recognition and cash that she could ask for.

    [ Parent ]

    I love (5.00 / 11) (#88)
    by chrisvee on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:48:39 AM EST
    the myth that he's a party outsider who defeated the inevitable candidate the best. I think we all know who was the choice of the Democratic establishment and it wasn't the one wearing the pantsuit.

    [ Parent ]
    And I love the myth that HRC is a populist (none / 0) (#107)
    by Media Browski on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:53:12 AM EST
    outsider who just happens to have been born wealthy, gone to ivy-league schools, is a member of the DLC, and is married to an ex-president.

    I mean what?

    [ Parent ]

    You're showing your age again (5.00 / 7) (#129)
    by MMW on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:59:39 AM EST
    HRC was not born wealthy. Worked har backside off for everything she has.

    BTW - Her husband was of humbler means than she was.

    Barack's grandmother was the VP of a bank. His step father was wealthy and he only attended private schools.

    See, you don't even know your candidate.

    [ Parent ]

    Showing my 35 years? How sexist of you (none / 0) (#202)
    by Media Browski on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:17:40 AM EST
    to mention a woman's age . . . kidding.

    Funny, I thought HRC's father owned his own business and her mother could be a homemaker.  Where I grew up in Indiana, that's rich.

    And I'm very aware of Bill's history. I was, after all, not in a coma through the 90s.

    Yes, those food stamps show how rich he was . . . and I attended private schools too.  And I was born poor as a bird.

    [ Parent ]

    Who is the privileged candidate? (5.00 / 1) (#360)
    by befuddledvoter on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 12:20:37 PM EST
    Obama.

    Fact: both his mother and father had post-graduate degrees.  HIllary's mother was a high school graduate. Her father did have an undergraduate degree.  His father worked in a mill.

    Obama was essentially reared by his grandparents.  Grandmother was a bank VP in Hawaii, not too shabby.  He attended the most elite prep school on the island.  Hillary graduated from public high school and was a National Merit Scholar.  While she was at Yale Law School, her family was eligible for government backed student loans.  So the family could not have been so wealthy.

    The summer between Obama's soph. year at Occidental and jr. year at Columbia, Obama had the money to travel the world:  CA to Indonesia, to Pakistan, on to India back to CA and then NYC.  Nice trip and very pricey, indeed.  Hillary talks of one college summer she spent in Alaska.  And, how was that financed?  She took a job cleaning fish in a fishery.  

    Now who is the privileged one??  

    [ Parent ]

    10 comments per 24 hours (none / 0) (#210)
    by waldenpond on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:19:46 AM EST
    New commentors are limited to 10 comments per 24 hours.  You are at 14.

    Please read the rules.  No insulting the site, candidates, or the other posters.  Thanks.

    [ Parent ]

    Wellesley is not in the Ivy League (none / 0) (#142)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:02:37 AM EST
    She went to an Ivy League law school.

    If we want to get pedantic about it.

    [ Parent ]

    Well, being pedantic about it (none / 0) (#205)
    by Media Browski on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:18:23 AM EST
    does seem to be the way the two sides approach each other.

    Good luck BTD.

    [ Parent ]

    Wellesley is one of the (none / 0) (#220)
    by FlaDemFem on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:21:04 AM EST
    Seven Sisters, which are the equivalent of the Ivy League schools for women. Bryn Mawr is also one of the Seven Sisters. If I had the time, I would look up the rest of them since I can't remember them off hand. But Wellesley is a very very good school. And Hillary Clinton gave the first ever commencement address by a student  at any college, which brought her to national attention, in 1969. That was when Obama was nine years old. Heh.

    [ Parent ]
    She was not born wealthy (none / 0) (#160)
    by Democratic Cat on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:07:05 AM EST
    What a crock. She was brought up in a middle class household, second generation American on her father's side, attended public schools, went to Wellesley (which is not in the Ivy League, BTW) and Yale (which is). How horrible that she was so accomplished as a young woman and made something of herself. And of what possible relevance is the fact that the guy she married grew up to become President? That makes her not a populist?

    Can only poor people be populists? Were you leading the band speaking up about Sen. Edwards' haircuts? I'm sorry, but yours is a pathetic comment.

    [ Parent ]

    The party favorite? (5.00 / 3) (#105)
    by pie on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:52:56 AM EST
    Hilarious.

    Go practice your whining.  You'll need to get much better at it when the repubs start in on Obama.

    It doesn't appear to me that people like you care about November anyway.  Otherwise, you wouldn't be here this morning spewing more divisive rhetoric.  Not too bright.

    [ Parent ]

    What you have written there is so much delusion (5.00 / 6) (#124)
    by MMW on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 08:57:09 AM EST
    it is a wonder you haven't been committed.

    Racism is accepting so little from a black man. No resume. No accomplishments. Nothing done for you, his constituents or the AA community. No fixed stand on any issue.

    Teacher's unions overwhelmingly supported her, because she supported giving them the resources necessary to educate students across the board. He supports merit pay for teachers. Tax breaks for student loans do not make them more available.

    He has effectively squashed any healthcare reform by employing Republican Harry and Louise ads - the republicans will remind him - they have backbones and brass acorns.

    What is his position on trade and infrastructure?

    What is the movement for? For unity? Funny, but he can't even unify his party. Is it for votes? Slaves were 3/5 of a whole. The people of Florida and Michigan are 1/2 a person according to his party.

    Defeated the party favorite? yes, the favorite of DEMOCRATIC VOTERS. BUT he is the ESTABLISHMENT candidate (Kerry, Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid - those are your leaders darling and they supported him). BTW - they're still the DO-NOTHING-CONGRESS.

    Ask him where his cash came from?

    Oh and let's not forget age - with age comes wisdom - you have shown very little.

    [ Parent ]

    I'm sure you missed a talking point (none / 0) (#141)
    by Media Browski on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:02:09 AM EST
    somewhere in there.  This has indeed gone poorly, and I will blame HRC and you will blame BHO.

    I'm sorry it turned out this way, sorry I ventured to have this conversation, and I'm sorry if this election comes crashing down around us all.  I'm neither wise nor eloquent enough to say the right things, the good things, or the healing things.  I want this to be healed--the division between my mother and I is breaking my heart even as it reflect the fissures in our party.  But I don't know how.

    So I am sorry to you all.  Good luck.

    [ Parent ]

    um, yeah (5.00 / 1) (#207)
    by lilburro on Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 09:18:59 AM EST
    if you're still talking about Tuzla and incapable of understanding why Hillary and her more populist platform (jobs+healthcare) are indeed, relative to the other candidates, populist, then yes, it's true you do not have the healing words.

    The division in the party is in part because one candidate was an adored celebrity, and the other maligned and hated for the past year.  Acknowledging that will help heal the party.

    [ Parent ]

    I've always admired