 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Popular Views on Obama
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 16 Apr 08 - 03:27 PM That was not what I understood him to be saying in San Francisco, and it should not be distorted that way. He was making a simple point: people who grow accustomed to being neglected by government will grow apathetic about the important issues and will gravitate tot hose issues that are personal tot hem, where they feel they may still have some influence. This says nothing about the provenance of religion or its importance to individuals, but rather why people will resort to using it as a political standard, feeling unable to be heard on more important issues. That's what I thought he was saying anyway. Looks like someone saw an opportunity to distort his statement and make a paper tiger out of it again. Yawn. If all Hillary can do is campaign against things Barack did NOT say, its going to be a real show-in. Does McCain have more sense than to try to foist this kind of intentional alteration on voters? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Apr 08 - 03:34 PM Amos, Re many comments here on mudcat about "what McCain wants" That was not what I understood him to be saying, and it should not be distorted that way. Yet when I comment I have abuse heaped upon me. Or do you mean that you only want YOUR understanding of what people say to be mentioned? I think that Obama is a good candidate, and might make a good president ( in spite of the fact I disagree with his political bent) BUT it is not fair to pound on Bush ( as you have) and then complain when someone has a criticsm of Obama. HOW MANY times have YOU distorted what Bush said in order to bash him? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 16 Apr 08 - 04:27 PM I have not heaped abuse on you, Bruce--I would As to how many times Ihave distorted something Bush said, I can't say; I think he usually distorts his own ideas before they escape from his mouth, and even when he doesn't it is sometimes hard to see the idea clearly. But, on balance, I suppose Ihave done so a number of times. My complaint was that this creation of paper tigers is bad poltiiciking. It's bad for the orignators, for the voting public, for the targets, and for the elective process. But it seems to be an inevitable byproduict of ideological competuition. I agree with you he could make a good president, and I hope he gets the chance to prove it. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 16 Apr 08 - 08:14 PM JtS, Michael Gerson is a certified partisan Obama hater... I've been reading him for a long time and I don't take him too seriously anymore... As for the cut and pastes, I like Amos's style over bb's... Amos tends to post less of the article or op ed but enough for one to get the main idea... Then a link... BB, on the other hand just lets 'um fly... I dobn't know if he actaully reads them fully or not but I'd like to see more personal opinions and obervations that accompany the C 'n P's... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Apr 08 - 08:22 PM And Bobert is a certified partisan conservative hater... I've been reading him for a long time and I don't take him too seriously anymore... It seems like the Obama supporters are trying to outdo what they claim Bush has done, in ignoring any dissent from the "obama-line" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 16 Apr 08 - 08:35 PM No, not really, bb... I like conservastives just fine,,, Not too many of them around anymore.. They have all capitulated... I view Obama as far more conservative than Bush... Bush is a radical... He has acted wrecklessly on just about every front... We need more cautious and thoughfull policies... There hasn't been much, if any, of those qualities in the Bush administration... I know that you can't accept Bush as a radical but he has shown to be just that... And I know that you can't see Obama as more conservative than Bush and that is the sad part about partisanship... I don't believe, bb, that you could begin to list the tenents of the conservative movement without Googling it up... That's why, IMO, I see you as a partisan... Partisans don't much care about core values, only that they are or aren't in the winner's circle... This isn't meant to be mean... Or disrespectfull... Just observations of your positions over the years... Oh sure, you love to try to turn that back onto me but it don't stick... I don't vote parties... I vote (or not) candidates... The last Dem I voted for for presdient was Carter so you can't stick "partisan on me"... I've carried my values with with me for a long time now and believe me, if Obama screws up I'll be on him like ugly on a gorilla... I just haven't seen the screw up yet but you can take it to the bank that if I see it I won't rationalize it and defend him... Wish you could say the same about your 7 years of defending Bush at every turn... Yeah, bb, tell us what it is about Bush that fits the conservative mold... This oughtta be quite enlightening... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: beardedbruce Date: 16 Apr 08 - 08:39 PM "believe me, if Obama screws up I'll be on him like ugly on a gorilla... I just haven't seen the screw up yet but you can take it to the bank that if I see it I won't rationalize it and defend him..." Unfortunately, I cannot believe this of most of his supporters- If ANY criticism is met with denial, how can you ever know if he "screws up"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 16 Apr 08 - 09:24 PM I'm watching his every step, bb... Now, when are you going to answer my question about conservastism... BTW, I worked for a "conservative" poli-sci professor in college so don't try to bs me 'cause I know the in's and out's of conservatism... I'm reaaly anxious to here where you agree with Bush as a conservative...Have at it... B~ ps Now I goota go back to watching Obama... The debates are on... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 16 Apr 08 - 09:49 PM Gerson was one of the major speechwriters in GWB's first term. Anything he says therefore should, it seems, be taken cum (monstrous) grano salis. Also, he is a columnist. Sense and logic are not required for this job--but there is pressure to come up with a column periodically-and if it's absurd enough to stimulate letters to the editor, that's not considered a minus. I have more to say on the column--later, if time permits. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 16 Apr 08 - 11:45 PM Curses, missed the debate tonight--totally forgot it. So I could only check the analysis afterward. Consensus seemed to be that Obama was on the defensive, especially in the first part. 4 supposedly hurtful topics for him were the subjects: Rev. Wright, William Ayers (Weather Underground figure who seems to have been involved in putting on a fundraiser when Obama was running for IL state senator (or something like that--I'm sure Rig or another helpful cynic will be along to fill in the gaps)---, flag lapel pin, and of course "bitterness". What's interesting is that aside from "bitterness", which is a gross oversimplification of Obama's views on blue-collar people, all of these "issues" are in the past--some quite a while ago. On the other hand, on the horizon coming up very soon--25 April-- will be a status conference hearing in the case of Paul vs Clinton. This a supposed scheme by the Clintons to extract millions of dollars from Paul in illegal donations and then cover it up. Discovery expected to start in May. Complaint says that Bill Clinton promised to promote Paul's Internet entertainment company, Stan Lee Media, in exchange for stock, cash options, and massive contributions to Hillary's 2000 Senate campaign. Paul alleges he was directed by the Clintons and Democratic party leaderss to produce, pay for, and then join them in lying about footing the bill for an August 2000 Hollywood gala and fundraiser. So much for Hillary's being "thoroughly vetted". And of course, undeniably, for the foreseeable future, a President Hillary Clinton would be married to the #1 lobbyist in the world. Conflicts of interest? It's just possible. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 16 Apr 08 - 11:48 PM "This is a supposed scheme...." "leaders" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 17 Apr 08 - 01:32 AM Yeah, it looks like Obama was like a pecan tree in a hurricane. They blew at him until the branches touched the ground then he snapped right back up. It was very brave of him to take a debate where Clinton poodle snuffleupagus was the "moderator". On the other hand when asked if Obama could win. "Rocky" Clinton said "yes yes yes." She also said "thats why I am still in the race. She seems to be admitting the inevitable at last. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 17 Apr 08 - 08:00 AM The curious thing about these debates they have in elections is that people always seem to think that the person they favour did best. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 17 Apr 08 - 08:10 AM Well, it sho nuff was a George 'n Charlie ambush of a debate... Like I have pointed out in another thread, the UP gathering last Monday when the Obama was called "Obama bin Laden" to the laughter of the media signaled that the media has turned on Obama... And this morning's New York Times has declared last night's debate Obama's worst performance... I watched the debate and thought that seeing as it was the worst moderated debate of them all that Obama hung in there and refused to allow himself to be baited... It's sad when the media views a candidate who refuses to get nasty as weak... BTW, Obama has been endorsed by Bruce Springstein which should give him a slight boost with the blue collar workers that Clinton/McCain/BigMedia is so intent on riling up against Obama... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 17 Apr 08 - 10:49 AM Barack Obama's comments on small towns have not been lost on his campaign. On the heels of picking up three superdelegates yesterday, today they announced the endorsement of superdelegate Reggie Whitten from Oklahoma. Whitten makes sure to speak positively of Obama's connection to small town voters three times in a single statement. "I have decided to endorse Senator Barack Obama and will work wholeheartedly to see him become the next President of the United States. Some say there is no particular need to endorse at the present time. However, I believe this is a defining moment, not only for our Party, but also more importantly for our country. Therefore, I made the decision to commit now. "While deciding to support Senator Obama, I thought of my history and my future. I'm from the small town of Seminole, Oklahoma: a city that is predominantly hard-working middle class citizens. It is important that our next President keep small towns like Seminole in mind when he talks about our economy. I am very sincere in my belief that Senator Obama will do just that. When I talk about my future, I, like most people, think of my children. The next administration will have a great deal to say about their future and the world they inherit. As a parent, I am confident Senator Obama has the courage, skill, and experience necessary to lead America forward. "Whether it is his willingness to tell corporate America what it needs to hear instead of what it wants to hear, restoring America's standing abroad, or inspiring young Americans to commit themselves to public service, Senator Obama's message is equally refreshing and inspiring. It is no coincidence that voters, especially young voters, are turning out to vote in record numbers."... HUffington Post |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 17 Apr 08 - 11:12 AM Obama gains support, now leads among elected superdelegates For those of you keeping score, Barack Obama has now moved past Hillary Clinton in terms of announced support from elected superdelegates (governors, senators and representatives). He picked up three more on Wednesday. Obama still trails Clinton slightly in overall superdelegates, 257-234. But in overall delegates he leads by 141, 1,650-1,509. This according to the authoritative NBC count. Still, not enough for anyone's victory. Next stop: Pennsylvania come Tuesday. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Jack the Sailor Date: 17 Apr 08 - 11:49 AM I don't think that Springsteen helps among blue collar workers. But he will erode Hillary's base of elitist liberals. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 17 Apr 08 - 12:31 PM Michele went on the Cobert Report the other day, and she ran circles around him. (Not verbatim) Colbert: "We all know you and Barack are elitists. How elitist was it, growing up on the South side of Chicago? How many silver spoons did you have in your mouth?? MO: Well, we had...four. Four spoons. Colbert: FOUR? So that tag sticks? MO: Well, then Daddy got a promotion at the plant and we had five spoons. Colbert told her she was a beautiful woman and then asked if his saying that would make Obama mad enough to come on the show and punch him. MO: Well...maybe if you sang to me, also... Colbert: (Sings a few lines) MO: Oh, well, Barack has a better voice than you do, anyway..." She was terrific. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 17 Apr 08 - 12:34 PM Well, JtS, it all depends on what songs Bruce is willing to allow Obama to use at rallies... "Born in the USA" might be a tad thred worn but it still gets blue collar folks pumped up, especially if Bruce performs it live at Obama rallies... Hey, folks... I've been thinking that after Obama gets hillary off hos back that it would be a very good idea for him to approach Colin Powell about returning as Secretary of State, but with a new "mission"... Powell, interestingly, has not endorsed McCain and I think that Powell would shut up the folks who are saying that Obama doesn't have any foreign policy experience... What do you all think??? (((Lunch break is over... Back to work)))) B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 17 Apr 08 - 01:02 PM If Barack could convince Colin that he woudl be returning to a kinder, gentler Administration, capable of spreading a million points of light, he might nibble on it. Don't forget that Colin got bit pretty hard in the ass by the duplicity of the Bush Admin for doing that hokey-pokey U.N. slide and pony show. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 17 Apr 08 - 01:37 PM You've got to wonder how 2 black candidates on the same ticket would play deep in the heart of Dixie. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 17 Apr 08 - 01:44 PM Rig, I don't think SecState applicants are placed on the ticket for the national election. And I don't think catering to bigotry is advisable or amusing. There's enough swole-headed, one-eyed penis-brained ignorance at play in the world as it is, without adding to it, don't you agree? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 17 Apr 08 - 02:00 PM Sorry, I thought you were talking about Powell as VP. And I would agree, catering to bigotry is bad form, but electability is something one cannot lose sight of. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 17 Apr 08 - 06:58 PM Posted so that you won't have to log in. In Pa. Debate, The Clear Loser Is ABC ABC News moderators Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos seemed to be playing a game of gotcha at last night's candidates' debate. By Tom Shales Thursday, April 17, 2008; Washington Post. When Barack Obama met Hillary Clinton for another televised Democratic candidates' debate last night, it was more than a step forward in the 2008 presidential election. It was another step downward for network news -- in particular ABC News, which hosted the debate from Philadelphia and whose usually dependable anchors, Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos, turned in shoddy, despicable performances. For the first 52 minutes of the two-hour, commercial-crammed show, Gibson and Stephanopoulos dwelled entirely on specious and gossipy trivia that already has been hashed and rehashed, in the hope of getting the candidates to claw at one another over disputes that are no longer news. Some were barely news to begin with. The fact is, cable networks CNN and MSNBC both did better jobs with earlier candidate debates. Also, neither of those cable networks, if memory serves, rushed to a commercial break just five minutes into the proceedings, after giving each candidate a tiny, token moment to make an opening statement. Cable news is indeed taking over from network news, and merely by being competent. Gibson sat there peering down at the candidates over glasses perched on the end of his nose, looking prosecutorial and at times portraying himself as a spokesman for the working class. Blunderingly he addressed an early question, about whether each would be willing to serve as the other's running mate, "to both of you," which is simple ineptitude or bad manners. It was his job to indicate which candidate should answer first. When, understandably, both waited politely for the other to talk, Gibson said snidely, "Don't all speak at once." For that matter, the running-mate question that Gibson made such a big deal over was decidedly not a big deal -- especially since Wolf Blitzer asked it during a previous debate televised and produced by CNN. The boyish Stephanopoulos, who has done wonders with the network's Sunday morning hour, "This Week" (as, indeed, has Gibson with the nightly "World News"), looked like an overly ambitious intern helping out at a subcommittee hearing, digging through notes for something smart-alecky and slimy. He came up with such tired tripe as a charge that Obama once associated with a nutty bomb-throwing anarchist. That was "40 years ago, when I was 8 years old," Obama said with exasperation. Obama was right on the money when he complained about the campaign being bogged down in media-driven inanities and obsessiveness over any misstatement a candidate might make along the way, whether in a speech or while being eavesdropped upon by the opposition. The tactic has been to "take one statement and beat it to death," he said. No sooner was that said than Gibson brought up, yet again, the controversial ravings of the pastor at a church attended by Obama. "Charlie, I've discussed this," he said, and indeed he has, ad infinitum. If he tried to avoid repeating himself when clarifying his position, the networks would accuse him of changing his story, or changing his tune, or some other baloney. This is precisely what has happened with widely reported comments that Obama made about working-class people "clinging" to religion and guns during these times of cynicism about their federal government. "It's not the first time I made a misstatement that was mangled up, and it won't be the last," said Obama, with refreshing candor. But candor is dangerous in a national campaign, what with network newsniks waiting for mistakes or foul-ups like dogs panting for treats after performing a trick. The networks' trick is covering an election with as little emphasis on issues as possible, then blaming everyone else for failing to focus on "the issues." Some news may have come out of the debate (ABC News will pretend it did a great job on today's edition of its soppy, soap-operatic "Good Morning America"). Asked point-blank if she thought Obama could defeat presumptive Republican contender John McCain in the general election, Clinton said, "Yes, yes, yes," in apparent contrast to previous remarks in which she reportedly told other Democrats that Obama could never win. And in turn, Obama said that Clinton could "absolutely" win against McCain. To this observer, ABC's coverage seemed slanted against Obama. The director cut several times to reaction shots of such Clinton supporters as her daughter, Chelsea, who sat in the audience at the Kimmel Theater in Philly's National Constitution Center. Obama supporters did not get equal screen time, giving the impression that there weren't any in the hall. The director also clumsily chose to pan the audience at the very start of the debate, when the candidates made their opening statements, so Obama and Clinton were barely seen before the first commercial break. At the end, Gibson pompously thanked the candidates -- or was he really patting himself on the back? -- for "what I think has been a fascinating debate." He's entitled to his opinion, but the most fascinating aspect was waiting to see how low he and Stephanopoulos would go, and then being appalled at the answer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 17 Apr 08 - 08:45 PM "HILADELPHIA: Hillary Clinton, already fighting with her back to the wall, got more bad news - Democrats now see her rival Barack Obama as better able to defeat Republican presumptive candidate John McCain. A poll by ABC News/Washington Posed released yesterday shows that Democrats now believe that Obama is more likely to win in November elections by a huge margin of 62 to 31 per cent. This takes away her major argument to super delegates, who are likely to finally decide on the candidate, that she is more likely to win the election. This new figures show dramatic support for Obama who was trailing Clinton by five percentage points in February. The poll finds other pronounced problems for Clinton. Among all Americans, 58 percent now say she's not honest and not trustworthy, 16 points higher than in a pre campaign poll two years ago. Obama beats her head-to-head on this attribute by a 23-point margin. " ... Economic Times |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 17 Apr 08 - 08:47 PM "Senator Barack ObamaÕs debate performance last night may have been panned, but he was endorsed today by the Philadelphia Daily News. That makes it a sweep for Mr. Obama among PennsylvaniaÕs major newspapers. ÒMost candidates claim that they will change the way business is done in Washington,Ó the paper writes. ÒBarack Obama has made us believe that, yes, he can.Ó The Philadelphia Inquirer endorsed him back in February, before neighboring New Jersey voted on Super Tuesday. On Wednesday, he was endorsed by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Patriot-News in Harrisburg. But perhaps the most significant catch for Mr. Obama was the nod from the Times Tribune, which is based in Scranton Ñ the largely white, working-class, Catholic town where Mrs. ClintonÕs family has deep roots and which she has adopted as her hometown in this campaign. With the exception of The InquirerÕs, the endorsements came after Mr. Obama made his comments about small-town voters being bitter because of their economic condition, making them cling to their guns and religion...." NY Times |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Charley Noble Date: 17 Apr 08 - 09:00 PM Thanks for posting this, Jack. I wouldn't normally run across this article. Maybe ABC was just trying to "toughen up" Obama for the fall campaign, not let him get too cocky. I do agree that they neglected a lot of important National issues that voters should be considering, in their determination to probe the personal ones. Charley noble |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 17 Apr 08 - 11:17 PM No matter who one supports, the things that were raised in the debate last night were just a nibbling around the edges of what the Republicans will come forward with in the general election. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Azizi Date: 18 Apr 08 - 09:41 AM Here's news about another endorsement for Barack Obama: "Robert Reich, Bill Clinton's first Secretary of Labor and a friend of both the former president and his wife for four decades... intends [to] formally to declare his support for Obama on his blog. ...Reich insists that the endorsement does indeed come as a surprise — to him. As we chatted in Washington, where Reich had come from Berkeley, where he teaches, to give a speech and meet with some Democrats on Capitol Hill, he explained that, despite the criticisms he's made of the Clintons ("I call it as I see it"), he had planned to refrain from offering an official backing for Obama out of respect for Hillary. "She's an old friend," Reich said, "I've known her 40 years. I was absolutely dead set against getting into the whole endorsement thing. I've struggled with it. I've not wanted to do it. Out of loyalty to her, I just felt it would be inappropriate." So what's changed? I asked Reich. "I saw the ads" — the negative man-on-street commercials that the Clinton campaign put up in Pennsylvania in the wake of Obama's bitter/cling comments a week ago — "and I was appalled, frankly. I thought it represented the nadir of mean-spirited, negative politics. And also of the politics of distraction, of gotcha politics. It's the worst of all worlds. We have three terrible traditions that we've developed in American campaigns. One is outright meanness and negativity. The second is taking out of context something your opponent said, maybe inartfully, and blowing it up into something your opponent doesn't possibly believe and doesn't possibly represent. And third is a kind of tradition of distraction, of getting off the big subject with sideshows that have nothing to do with what matters. And these three aspects of the old politics I've seen growing in Hillary's campaign. And I've come to the point, after seeing those ads, where I can't in good conscience not say out loud what I believe about who should be president. Those ads are nothing but Republicanism. They're lending legitimacy to a Republican message that's wrong to begin with, and they harken back to the past 20 years of demagoguery on guns and religion. It's old politics at its worst — and old Republican politics, not even old Democratic politics. It's just so deeply cynical."... In his disgust with Hillary's increasingly harsh tactics, Reich is hardly alone. Indeed, the feeling seems to be spreading more broadly in the party with every passing day. It's been clear for some time that Hillary's attacks on Obama were driving up her negatives. You could certainly argue this might be a price worth paying if those attacks were amping up doubts about him. But it's hard to see any logic — or even sanity — in the tactic if the result is to drive even people who once regarded Hillary dearly into Obama's arms". — John Heilemann http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/04/heilemann_robert_reich_to_endo.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 18 Apr 08 - 02:43 PM Obama keeps rolling as Clinton running out of time Fri Apr 18, 2008 1:57pm EDT WASHINGTON (Reuters) - After a tough six-week stretch of campaign gaffes, roaring controversies and heightened scrutiny, Barack Obama's presidential bid appears as strong as ever -- and rival Hillary Clinton is running out of time to change the script. Obama has expanded his lead on Clinton in many national polls and gained ground on her in the next battleground of Pennsylvania ahead of Tuesday's vote, despite furors over his remarks on small-town residents and inflammatory comments by his former pastor. Clinton's image appeared to take a heavier hit after wrongly claiming she faced sniper fire in Bosnia in 1996. A Washington Post poll this week found more Americans have an unfavorable impression of her than at any time since she entered the national limelight in 1992. "It hasn't been a bed of roses for Obama. He's had some problems. But she is the one whose negatives are going up," said Phil Noble, head of the South Carolina New Democrats group and an Obama supporter. Obama has a nearly unassailable lead on the New York senator in delegates to the August nominating convention and in popular votes won in the first three months of the primary battle. Clinton hopes a big Pennsylvania win ignites a strong run through the final nine contests, fundamentally reordering the race and giving her fresh evidence to argue she is the strongest candidate to face Republican John McCain in November's presidential election. But polls show Obama has whittled her once substantial double-digit lead in Pennsylvania to single digits. A Zogby poll on Friday put her lead at 4 points, a Rasmussen poll showed it at 3 points and a Los Angeles Times poll earlier this week had it at 5 points. ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 18 Apr 08 - 03:48 PM In spite of all the flap Obama is closing the gap I check this poll every day. All week Hillary has been 6.0 ahead. Not it is 5.6. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 18 Apr 08 - 04:51 PM Spaekin' of "nibbling around the edge", Rigs, just wait until you see what Obama has fir McWar after he sheds McClinton... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 18 Apr 08 - 06:55 PM Well, it looks like Clinton will be out after Pennsylvania, so I think the fireworks are about to begin. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 18 Apr 08 - 07:13 PM RCP is a great site, Jack, thanks. Here are major poll shifts in the last four months. I think they tell the tale: oll Date Sample Obama Clinton Spread RCP Average 04/07 - 04/17 - 49.2 40.3 Obama +8.9 Newsweek 04/16 - 04/17 588 RV 54 35 Obama +19.0 Gallup Tracking 04/15 - 04/17 1231 V 47 44 Obama +3.0 Rasmussen Tracking 04/14 - 04/17 900 LV 46 41 Obama +5.0 ABC/Wash Post 04/10 - 04/13 643 A 51 41 Obama +10.0 Reuters/Zogby 04/10 - 04/13 532 LV 51 38 Obama +13.0 AP-Ipsos 04/07 - 04/09 489 LV 46 43 Obama +3.0 CBS News/NY Times 03/28 - 04/02 510 LV 46 43 Obama +3.0 Hotline/FD 03/28 - 03/31 342 LV 50 38 Obama +12.0 NBC/WSJ 03/24 - 03/25 RV 45 45 Tie Pew Research 03/19 - 03/22 618 RV 49 39 Obama +10.0 FOX News 03/18 - 03/19 388 RV 38 40 Clinton +2.0 CBS News 03/15 - 03/18 LV 46 43 Obama +3.0 CNN 03/14 - 03/16 463 RV 52 45 Obama +7.0 USA Today/Gallup 03/14 - 03/16 530 A 49 42 Obama +7.0 Reuters/Zogby 03/13 - 03/14 525 LV 47 44 Obama +3.0 NBC/WSJ 03/07 - 03/10 RV 43 47 Clinton +4.0 Newsweek 03/05 - 03/06 573 RV 45 44 Obama +1.0 ABC/Wash Post 02/28 - 03/02 629 A 50 43 Obama +7.0 Rasmussen 02/28 - 03/02 900 LV 44 45 Clinton +1.0 LA Times/Bloomberg 02/21 - 02/25 LV 48 42 Obama +6.0 AP-Ipsos 02/22 - 02/24 473 RV 46 43 Obama +3.0 USA Today/Gallup 02/21 - 02/24 1009 A 51 39 Obama +12.0 CBS News/NY Times 02/20 - 02/24 427 LV 54 38 Obama +16.0 Pew Research 02/20 - 02/24 633 RV 49 40 Obama +9.0 Rasmussen 02/19 - 02/22 900 LV 44 43 Obama +1.0 FOX News 02/19 - 02/20 391 LV 44 44 Tie Hotline/FD 02/14 - 02/17 361 LV 43 45 Clinton +2.0 Reuters/Zogby 02/13 - 02/16 494 LV 52 38 Obama +14.0 Rasmussen 02/12 - 02/15 900 LV 47 43 Obama +4.0 AP-Ipsos 02/07 - 02/10 520 A 41 46 Clinton +5.0 USA Today/Gallup 02/08 - 02/09 525 A 47 44 Obama +3.0 Rasmussen 02/05 - 02/08 900 LV 42 48 Clinton +6.0 Newsweek 02/06 - 02/07 602 RV 42 41 Obama +1.0 Time 02/01 - 02/04 439 LV 42 48 Clinton +6.0 CNN 02/01 - 02/03 500 RV 49 46 Obama +3.0 Cook/RT Strategies 01/31 - 02/02 376 RV 43 37 Obama +6.0 Pew Research 01/30 - 02/02 596 RV 38 46 Clinton +8.0 USA Today/Gallup 01/30 - 02/02 985 LV 44 45 Clinton +1.0 CBS News/NY Times 01/30 - 02/02 491 LV 41 41 Tie ABC/Wash Post 01/30 - 02/01 LV 43 47 Clinton +4.0 Rasmussen 01/29 - 02/01 900 LV 37 45 Clinton +8.0 FOX News 01/30 - 01/31 377 LV 37 47 Clinton +10.0 NBC/WSJ 01/20 - 01/22 Adults 32 47 Clinton +15.0 LA Times/Bloomberg 01/18 - 01/22 532 LV 33 42 Clinton +9.0 Rasmussen 01/16 - 01/19 900 LV 34 38 Clinton +4.0 AP-Ipsos 01/15 - 01/17 453 RV 33 40 Clinton +7.0 CNN 01/14 - 01/17 448 RV 33 42 Clinton +9.0 USA Today/Gallup 01/11 - 01/13 1021 LV 33 45 Clinton +12.0 Reuters/Zogby 01/11 - 01/13 459 LV 38 39 Clinton +1.0 Pew Research 01/09 - 01/13 621 RV 31 46 Clinton +15.0 Hotline/FD 01/10 - 01/12 380 LV 35 38 Clinton +3.0 CBS News/NY Times 01/09 - 01/12 508 LV 27 42 Clinton +15.0 ABC/Wash Post 01/09 - 01/12 423 LV 37 42 Clinton +5.0 CNN 01/09 - 01/10 443 RV 36 49 Clinton +13.0 USA Today/Gallup 01/04 - 01/06 499 A 33 33 Tie1 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 18 Apr 08 - 07:28 PM Amos if you can see a tale in that jumble you have proved yourself to be superior to me in yet another area of endeavour! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 18 Apr 08 - 07:46 PM Baracky!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 18 Apr 08 - 08:35 PM Sam Nunn Endorsement!! Woo Hoo! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 18 Apr 08 - 10:05 PM Just scan the right hand column from the bottom up, Jack. It shows the sad fate of the MV Hillary Clinton, whose deck chairs, in the end, did not even serve as life preservers. And in other news: (NYT) "Some Clinton advisers also said that the focus on Mr. ObamaÕs Òguns or religionÓ comment was a way to put him on the spot with so-called values voters Ñ in part to offset Mrs. ClintonÕs baggage in this area. According to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll, conducted March 28-April 2 with 1,196 registered voters nationwide, 60 percent of them believe Mrs. Clinton shared the values that most Americans tried to live by, and 34 percent did not. Both Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain fared better, with Mr. Obama performing best Ñ 70 percent said he shared those values, and 21 percent said he did not." That quote from Eleanor Roosevelt at the end of "Baracky" is a genuine lightning bolt. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 18 Apr 08 - 11:41 PM I'd still, as I did earlier in the thread, like to counsel against euphoria. The predictions for PA are all over the map. I've seen one that put Hillary 14% ahead. The recent "debate" did not help Obama. Hillary still has to take PA by 15% or above-- and it's unlikely. We should require that sort of margin for her to claim any kind of "victory". If we start citing 6%, 4% etc., then if she does better than that, we'll hear--yet again--about a "miraculous" recovery. We don't need that. If she doesn't narrow the gap by a lot more than 10 delegates after the PA, NC, IN, group of primaries, it will be obvious--above all to her own fundraisers--that she has no chance. So she will fold--and give a wonderfully magnanimous speech. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 20 Apr 08 - 03:08 AM The Nation --"As Bill Clinton's first Secretary of Labor, he was the liberal conscience of the Clinton administration. A friend of the Clintons for decades, the academic and author worked closely with Hillary Clinton before and during the 1992, while she was First Lady and after she left the White House to become the U.S. Senator from New York. Few Americans know the Clintons better. Few Americans know Hillary Clinton better. Here is what Reich says about the race for the Democratic presidential nomination in a new blog titled: "Obama for President." 'The formal act of endorsing a candidate is generally (and properly)limited to editorial pages and elected officials whose constituents might be influenced by their choice. The rest of us shouldn't assume anyone cares. My avoidance of offering a formal endorsement until now has also been affected by the pull of old friendships and my reluctance as a teacher and commentator to be openly partisan. But my conscience won't let me be silent any longer. I believe that Barack Obama should be elected President of the United States. Although Hillary Clinton has offered solid and sensible policy proposals, Obama's strike me as even more so. His plans for reforming Social Security and health care have a better chance of succeeding. His approaches to the housing crisis and the failures of our financial markets are sounder than hers. His ideas for improving our public schools and confronting the problems of poverty and inequality are more coherent and compelling. He has put forward the more enlightened foreign policy and the more thoughtful plan for controlling global warming. He also presents the best chance of creating a new politics in which citizens become active participants rather than cynical spectators. He has energized many who had given up on politics. He has engaged young people to an extent not seen in decades. He has spoken about the most difficult problems our society faces, such as race, without spinning or simplifying. He has rightly identified the armies of lawyers and lobbyists that have commandeered our democracy, and pointed the way toward taking it back. Finally, he offers the best hope of transcending the boundaries of class, race, and nationality that have divided us. His life history exemplifies this, as do his writings and his record of public service. For these same reasons, he offers the best possibility of restoring America's moral authority in the world." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 20 Apr 08 - 10:17 AM In the end, it will be business as usual once McCain takes office. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 20 Apr 08 - 11:15 AM Rig: Being humorous again? That sort of smug tone is the clue...it comes from having your tongue in your cheek, so people will THINK you have your head up your ass when you really don't...right? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 20 Apr 08 - 12:16 PM Funny thing. Rig claims to be against John McCain. But the only way to keep him out of the presidency will be to support Obama, the Democratic nominee. So, Rig, once again-- Will you support the Democratic nominee--who will be Obama-- in the fall? Yes or no? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 20 Apr 08 - 02:30 PM "April 19 (Bloomberg) -- Barack Obama is gaining support from Democratic establishment figures after a week of repeated attacks from his Democratic presidential rival, Hillary Clinton. Former Senators Sam Nunn and David Boren, two of the most prominent members of the party's conservative wing, endorsed Obama yesterday. Robert Reich, labor secretary under former President Bill Clinton and a longtime friend of the couple, also threw his support behind the Illinois senator, saying he was ``appalled'' by ``mean-spirited'' attacks. Obama's remarks earlier this month that some Americans in communities hit by job losses had ``gotten bitter and cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them'' ignited criticism from Clinton's campaign, which called him ``elitist.'' Even after those attacks, Obama, 46, won the backing of several superdelegates, the lawmakers and party officials who vote at the national convention. Local party officials who moved this week to Obama are ``like the canary in the coal mine for the Clinton campaign,'' said Steve McMahon, a Democratic strategist unaligned with either campaign. ``What they're saying reflects what a lot of people are thinking but not yet saying.'' Reggie Whitten, an attorney and superdelegate from Oklahoma, announced his support for Obama on April 17. He said he ``could have waited a while'' to endorse the Illinois senator, yet it wasn't ``fair'' for Clinton to focus on ``that one comment out of context.'' `Tired of Negativity' ``The American people are tired of the negativity, I think they're tired of fighting among the party and I think its time for the party to unite,'' Whitten said. ``I hope that my coming out will be one tiny little thing that will push in that direction.'' Nancy Larson, a DNC member from rural Minnesota, said Clinton's ``bothersome'' response contributed to her April 13 endorsement of Obama. Today, the Obama campaign said that Steve Achelpohl, the Nebraska Democratic Party chairman, was backing Obama. Achelpohl told the Lincoln Journal Star that people could rally behind Obama's ``positive campaign.'' The seven superdelegates who endorsed Obama this week also include three members of Congress and one city council member from the District of Columbia." (Bloomberg.com) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 20 Apr 08 - 02:32 PM If Hillary is eliminated, we're back to the same age old choice again, the lesser of two evils, McCain or Obama. It's sad, given there were a number of good Democratic choices we had to start out with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 20 Apr 08 - 05:04 PM Ah, Rig, If Hillary is eliminated, the best man will win the nomination. What's to mourn in that? If she is not, and she wins the nomination, she will demonstrate she's as good at dirty fighting as anyone in the Rove century, and will probably become President. At least Bill will be back in the house. Could do a lot worse, in any case. As demonstrated by the last eight years of chaos and greed. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 20 Apr 08 - 05:17 PM Well Amos, I would certainly agree that I couldn't think of anything worse than the last 8 years. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 20 Apr 08 - 07:25 PM PARIS -- The more things change, say the French, the more they remain the same. But France of 2008 is no longer the distant 1950s France of my youth. I admit nostalgia. In those days, most French refused to speak English, a process they found undignified and painful. Today, the new globalized generation loves English. France is becoming bilingual. Even France's entry into the Eurosong competition is -- mon dieu! -- in English. Paris taxi drivers, who once sought to install plates in their rear seats to electrocute passengers, have become shockingly polite. Retailers and waiters actually seem pleased to see you. The French have discovered a new happy pill. Wine and bread consumption, once staples of French life, are way down. French are drinking less but better wines. Oppressed French can't smoke in bars and restaurants any more. Youth live on junk food. The wonderful old smoky, black and white France of my youth, with her riots, Edith Piaf and Yves Montand, army plots, silly Left Bank intellectuals, and weird little Panhard and Simca cars has vanished. Europeans are fascinated by the U.S. presidential race. During two weeks of TV and radio broadcasting, the No. 1 question I was asked is who will win the U.S. primaries and November vote. LANDSLIDE If all non-Americans had a vote -- I've always favoured a one-tenth vote for non-Americans -- then Barack Obama would win in a landslide. Like North Americans, most Europeans really don't know much about the experience-light senator, but what they see, they like beaucoup. You can feel a passion here for Obama that is quite remarkable. He is, of course, the non-Bush. But so is Hillary Clinton, yet she inspires surprisingly little support even though hubby Bill, for reasons that elude me, was widely admired abroad. Hillary is regarded simply as an avatar of the Clinton political machine which, however formidable, is seen as empty of substance, and dedicated only to power and money. The three Americans most respected internationally are Obama, Jimmy Carter and Al Gore. They are seen as representing America's best qualities. They are also a potent antidote to the rednecks, holy rollers, and totalitarian neocon ideologues who hijacked the Republican Party -- my life-long party -- and blackened America's name around the globe. Obama is widely seen abroad as the candidate who can end the shameful Bush era and return America to a moderate, productive role in world affairs. He is expected to end the Iraq war and Bush's militarized foreign policy, and reintegrate the United States into the company of law-abiding, environmentally conscious nations, of which the European Union is now the leader. Obama comes across to Europeans as dignified, decent, eloquent, and truthful -- qualities notably lacking in Bush and Dick Cheney who often represent some of America's cruder instincts and synthetic patriotism. Much of the world would hail and admire America for electing a man of colour, but even more so, one who appears to capture so much of what is great and admirable about the United States. There are fears here the bitter Clinton-Obama contest may ruin both candidates, leading to four more years of Bush under John McCain. TOUGHEN UP But it may also benefit Obama. He needs to toughen up before facing the ferocious Republican attack machine that sunk war veteran John Kerry's campaign under a torrent of "swiftboat" lies. McCain is a gentleman, but not so Carl Rove's character assassins in waiting. Obama could sharply improve America's highly negative image as a determined enemy of the Muslim world. Not because his father was Muslim, but because of his image of fairness and sensible foreign policy proposals calling for open dialogue instead of confrontation. If Americans want to lower the terrorism threat against their nation, electing Obama is a good way to start.... (Edmonton Sun) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 20 Apr 08 - 10:42 PM Rig-- Exactly why do you refuse to answer the question?--since you supposedly want to keep McCain out. Will you support Obama in the fall if he is the Democratic nominee--yes or no? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 21 Apr 08 - 12:20 AM 1700A |
