Gosh, I hope he's right....

[Wendy!]

http://www.salon.com/opinion/kamiya/2008/05/13/obama_mccain/index.html

I am truly afraid you guys, I'm so unsure of what's going to happen. I know West Virginia's not a huge deal, but the mentality there scares me. I read another article interviewing a 70 year old West Virginia native as saying, "They won't go for a black man, that's just it," R.K. Horton, a retired heating and air conditioning business owner, said of his neighbors. "I don't think it's being racist necessarily, they just don't like black people that well." Ouch, I actually lived in West Virginia back in my travelling days and I can tell you, my brown skin was the talk of the town quite a few times during my stay there. I'm scared y'all

[millerjake30]

What a ridiculous article. Filled with cyncism and all the reasons why the country will vote for McCain and in a vain attempt to provide some audacious hope, says "I'm betting on youth." No he isn't. He very clearly isn't, and no one else should.

Barack Obama is a gift to the republican party.

[kremidas]

I hope so too. And I actually think he is.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/12/AR2008051203014_pf.html

That article lists some of the racism experienced by Obama campaigners in Indiana. I grew up in Indiana, and it is an extremely racist state. It's got more KKK members than any other state, and is the only state government ever to be run by the KKK. You could literally gauge a counties racism by how heavily it went for Clinton. For example, in the county that Martinsville resides in, a town which until some time in the last ten years had a big confederate flag at the entrance to the town that said "watch where you are after dark" under it, and has the largest KKK membership in the country, Clinton with well over 60 percent of the vote.

Now in this state, with it's long history of racism, Clinton STILL only won by less than 2 percent of the vote. So I think the author of that Salon article is on the right track, most definitely.

[kremidas]

Barack Obama is a gift to the republican party.

That must be why Republicans have been salivating for a Hillary nomination.

[millerjake30]

Its sort of a loss-loss for us with Hilary and Barack emerging as our two leading candidates. A woman on one side, and a black candidate on the other. There's still too large a portion of this country who won't jive with either of those details.

Hillary would lose by a wider margin than Barack, mainly because if she got the nomination without the popular vote it would alienate the democratic voters so much that they would either vote McCain or not vote at all. Its the best situation the republicans could've hoped for coming off of Bush's term.

Hillary and Barack are sort of a stocking-stuffer variety pack for the Republicans. Better?

[macarthur31]

This is definitely a change election in that the young voters and minorities will make an impact, and these are voters that are outside of the GOP tent. The brilliant analyst Poblano breaks it down (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/05/black-youth-and-latino-turnout-and.html) and shows that in the democratic primaries from '04-'08 that 18-29 year olds and Latinos have upped their participation by 52.4% and 41.9% respectively. Young adults comprised 13.7% of the total democratic primary vote, while Latinos comprised 7.5% of the vote. African-Americans were steady in their participation (up 7.8% in '08) and comprised 21% of the overall demo vote.

In an Obama-McCain matchup, Obama is going to get lopsided numbers with these core audiences. And if Vote for Change keeps truckin', that turnout number is just going to get bigger.

[kremidas]

Hillary and Barack are sort of a stocking-stuffer variety pack for the Republicans. Better?

Not really. I think that this plays into the cynicism and defeatist fears based on gender and/or race that republicans are banking on. In other words, republican strategists WANT you to believe that neither Hillary nor Barack stand a chance solely due to race or gender. Even though polls suggest this isn't the case. They both currently beat McCain in both national polls and electoral map polls. But facts have never stopped republicans from repeating the same thing over and over...

Do racism and sexism still exist in this country? Absolutely, but not to the extent that many would lead you to believe.

[stevescholz]

Hillary and Barack are sort of a stocking-stuffer variety pack for the Republicans. Better?

I disagree with your assessment. As Obama has shown with crossover Republican voting (watch for the new MoveOn.org ad called "Obamacan"), he has pulled voters of all ages, races, economic backgrounds, faiths and political viewpoints. Obama is "talking sense" and his campaign is resonating with many, many people. Someone framed it well today on the radio: Obama is getting hit by Clinton, McCain, the right-wing attack machine, and all the "haters" out there....and he's STILL winning! :)

The GOP is scared of Obama because they have very little with which to run against him. And Obama's campaign team is very savvy and very swift with their responses. People saw Obama dismiss Rev. Wright. People heard his speech on race. People are paying attention now more than ever, and that's what scares the GOP. Obama is running a positive campaign, and he's trying to win over every voter. Not select groups, not partisan groups, not racial groups, but every voter. Unity is in his blood. For the GOP, which thrives on division, this is all very frightening.

So the GOP is trying fear and smear tactics again, which is what the Clinton campaign has also used, to intimidate voters. But if those tactics were truly and continuously effective, Obama would not be where he is today.

I will not try to speak for any group of people the media like to pigeonhole. I will, however, say that Obama's approach to politics is like someone reaching out to a wounded soul and saying "I know you are suffering, and now is the time we work together to change that."

Will people who hold racist views ever vote for Obama? I don't know. The idea of "change" can be scary for people. Some folks may never stop clinging to racism because the true acceptance of others means they have to change how they treat/feel/react toward those not like themselves. But I suspect Obama is willing to reach out to racist people and offer them same chance he offers every other voter.

As for the Salon article, the writer does see Obama winning. But even there, I disagree with the "old" versus "young" idea being the defining difference.

I see the defining difference as "stable" versus "unstable." I believe Senator John McCain is an unstable man. His anger is well-documented, and as Americans get to know what he's like, more people will see a man who has difficulty keeping his cool. I fear that Senator McCain may be like those veterans who are "still fighting the Vietnam war" and those who feel war is the best solution to a nation's problems. We've already had one leader who ignored reality to perpetuate a trillion dollar war; I don't believe Americans are going to let that happen again. And especially not with a man prone to anger, who shows that his own self-interest rules his political career.

Obama, by contrast, is keeping his cool much of the time. He's a mature candidate, and that's impressing people. He's calling things like he sees them, all the while being respectful of people as people. I find it very revealing that when Obama began working with his campaign team he told them "nobody will be an a**hole in this campaign." And he's proving that everyday.

And that also makes the GOP freak the f*ck out. :D

[Wendy!]

Hillary and Barack are sort of a stocking-stuffer variety pack for the Republicans. Better?

Your cynicism is killing me which is exactly why I posted. This is the general mood and feeling of people who are not going to show up and vote and that is what I'm afraid of, however, I refuse to let that affect my vote and it's power in all of this. As a second generation latina-american who's informed, born in the Bronx, raised in Florida, now residing in Chicago...with all of the different political influences I have had, I think that I represent just the kind of voter that the GOP is afraid of, I don't fit their polls and stats, and I believe you're playing into their fear. When the GOP is afraid, they don't cower and back away, they attack and go down fighting with anything they can use against you, this is why it is important that regain a united front.

I just want the democratic party to unite as soon as possible, we need the people to see McCain for who he truly is, because I do agree with Steve there, John McCain is unstable. The sooner we unite and choose a candidate, the sooner we can get down to the real business at hand. My hope is when we do that, the defeatist attitude will begin to lift, and we may be able to save at least a small portion of what our country was founded on.

[hixx]

Ack, West Virginia! What are you doing?

I mean, I know what you're doing but COME ON.

My new favorite game is figuring out exactly what Hillary's motives are. On the one hand, I think "she's doing what she has to do, if people keep voting for her, especially in a huge landslide like she had last night, (no matter what the intention is of the voters) she has to stay in."

And then I think "OMG She's trying to ruin Obama and the party because she's so freaking selfish and egomaniacal, she'll do anything."

And then I think "She really has totally vetted Obes before he walks into the big fight and nothing can hold him back now and she's almost this crazy kind of mentor for him (this one pleases me but I don't see that its the truth)."

And THEN I think "who really cares because people all around the world keep dying in these really horrible natural disasters and the whole world is falling apart anyway, Hillary and her man-boy husband don't really matter to me anymore."

Sigh.

Hixx

[robbersean]

You know what? West Virginia is not that big of a deal at this point.Hillary picked up something like 15 pledged delegates, and Barry picked up 7. So Hill-Rod had a net gain of 8 delegates. WV represents .3% of the overall electorate.

So, right now, Barack leads the race in Super delegates, pledged delegates, and the popular vote. Hillary's camp is saying that she leads the popular vote, but she's including Michigan, and Florida which didn't count, and where Barack wasn't even on the ballot, and NOT including the Caucus states, almost all of which she lost.

If you want to feel better about the upcoming election (Obama v. McCain) remember a few things:

1) It shouldn't be too hard to tie the albatross of George W. around McCain's neck.
2) The Dems have been kicking butt in special elections. Just last night, they picked up a seat in the House in a VERY Republican district in Mississippi. This may be an indicator of the overall mood of the nation (that mood, Dems good, Republicans bad).
3) Obama is very handsome.

[millerjake30]

It is really difficult to judge anything about Obama's momentum or potential based on this primary election. The pool of republican voters that are simply not worrying about politics right now, not concerned with who the democratic candidate is, does still exist. Its easy to get so wrapped up in Hilary vs. Obama that we forget that these are only democratic voters here. Not to mention a small portion of the folks voting in these elections are going to end up voting for McCain as well. Obama - McCain will be VERY different than Obama - Clinton.

I hope with all my heart that Obama can win. I'm just not given enough hope by the people that surround me. There's a new generation of young voters excited about Obama...great. But that same old generation of votes that clung to Bush a second time still exists. The old people in my family who don't care to do anything but vote for the republicans. The religious. The stubborn. Its not young vs. old, its not stable vs. unstable: If the Obama campaign can get enough of the "lazy" out to vote for him, then maybe he can beat the republican's army of "stubborn."

[stevescholz]

I hope with all my heart that Obama can win. I'm just not given enough hope by the people that surround me. There's a new generation of young voters excited about Obama...great. But that same old generation of votes that clung to Bush a second time still exists. The old people in my family who don't care to do anything but vote for the republicans. The religious. The stubborn. Its not young vs. old, its not stable vs. unstable: If the Obama campaign can get enough of the "lazy" out to vote for him, then maybe he can beat the republican's army of "stubborn."

"Lazy" suggests that someone wants to do something, but doesn't get around to doing it. That's different from "disenfranchised" or "demoralized" or "disgusted," which is how some of our non-participating electorate feel. A lack of favorable results, and a lack of welcome participation, can affect if someone votes. Also, when people hear politicians talking about what's in it for them, but then see no action or different actions, trust gets lost. And that can lead to people deciding "I don't count, and they don't listen, so why bother?" I will not assign "lazy" to those people.

Voters may consider a lot of factors when deciding on a candidate, but it often comes down to the voters' self-interest. And for anyone reading this who has friends or relatives who are "stubborn," or whose views seem the complete opposite of your own, I encourage the following:

Sit down with them. Ask them about their views. Take them seriously, without judging, without ridiculing, and listen to them. Whatever they tell you, listen. Like in good improv, listen with your heart. Then tell them about Obama (or Clinton, or whomever you support). Speak about what you know to be true, and if they challenge you, remind them that you gave them time to be heard and you expect the same in return. Then show them information about your candidate. But be a human being about it. There are people who are unaware of what's real in the world because they've grown comfortable with other beliefs. When you offer them a chance to be heard and to hear things back, who knows what might transpire?

Quick personal story: I have a relative who's been an Evangelical Christian since her birth 70 years ago. I've had many conversations this year with her about the US Presidential race. When I mentioned that right-wing extremists within her own religion have been doing and suggesting some scary things, she agreed with me. Her reactions (both through her facial expressions and her words) made me realize that even she doesn't support the extreme tactics of others in her faith who grab the spotlight. She said she's still undecided about the general election, but I'm glad we had the chance to hear each other.

Steve

[hixx]

EDWARDS!


sweet sweet sweet.


Hixx

[Chip]

Hot damn, that's a nice "get".

-Chip

[Schoolyj]

Interesting this comes the day after Hil's "landslide" in WVA.

This will change the topic for the next week.

Not only did Edwards give BHO a big boost, but he also killed all the "can Barak get white-yokels to vote for him" stories for the next week or two.

Well played master-litigator. Well played.

[millerjake30]

Excellent News. Hopefully Edwards support will quicken Hilary's exit. Do you think this is a thank you for a vice presidential nom? being an Edwards fan, I'd hope he wouldn't do it. Just in case he may lose. It'd be political suicide to lose the presidential nom twice, then get on the ticket as VP and lose twice.

[Edison]

Interesting this comes the day after Hil's "landslide" in WVA.

This will change the topic for the next week.

Not only did Edwards give BHO a big boost, but he also killed all the "can Barak get white-yokels to vote for him" stories for the next week or two.

Well played master-litigator. Well played.

I couldn't agree more. The timing is too good. Hillary grabs the news headlines with a 'big win' in West Virginia, gleaning her 15 much-needed delegates. Then a day later Edwards delivers the smack-down. Ouch.

Edwards has 19 delegates, most (if not all) of them will likely fall into Obama's camp. Hopefully by the time we roll into election time we'll have a Democratic party with more unity than it's had in decades.


..And as far as Hillary Clinton's chances are concerned?

"It's over, Johnny."
http://www.theboxset.com/images/reviewcaptures/1397cap003.jpg

[macarthur31]

Had to be bittersweet for Edwards up there, as I'm sure 4 years ago he imagined himself to be the Democratic standard bearer. It was great to see him on stage with Obama.

Perfect way to play the post WV news cycle.

I don't see Edwards as VP again. He's committed to his OneAmerica project, and he's about ending poverty. It reminds me of how Gore took on the environment as his issue. However, I do like the scene of seeing two younger (40s-50s) candidates on stage together to contrast against McSame and whoever he's bringing along.

[millerjake30]

It seems like he'll go for VP if he feels very sure they'll win, which will put him in a good position for the 2016 election. If he has a good run as VP, he'll surely give it another shot.

[Schoolyj]

Publicly, Edwards has said he isn't interested in a position in a possible Obama admisitration, but I read a story in the NYT today that claimed that privately, he is open to VP or Attorney General.

I don't think Obama/Edwards is that great a ticket in that the best argument against each is their lack of experience on the national stage.

[nichbob]

I have read similar rumblings about him being appointed to Attorney General.

If memory serves, somebody brought this name up on this board: Wesley Clark. Is this possible? Wise? your thoughts?

Also, turned out to be an interesting day of political news with the Bush comments and immediate and stern response from so many democratic leaders.

How does Bush have the balls to invoke the name of Hitler and the Nazi party and use it as an attack against Obama and the Dems? Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't his grandfather a director at Union Banking Corporation when it was in trouble for defying the Trading with the Enemy act in WWII? Seriously, how many balls do you need to say things like this?

As Jon Oliver would say, "Three, it takes three balls."

[Edison]

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't his grandfather a director at Union Banking Corporation when it was in trouble for defying the Trading with the Enemy act in WWII?

This is, in fact, how the Bush family started their fortune.
Prescott Bush was little more than a tire salesman when he married into the Walker family.
Prescott Bush was also among a handful of people who plotted to overthrow the U.S. Government during the Roosevelt years;

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2007/240707fascistcoup.htm

[Schoolyj]

I have read similar rumblings about him being appointed to Attorney General.

If memory serves, somebody brought this name up on this board: Wesley Clark. Is this possible? Wise? your thoughts?

Also, turned out to be an interesting day of political news with the Bush comments and immediate and stern response from so many democratic leaders.

How does Bush have the balls to invoke the name of Hitler and the Nazi party and use it as an attack against Obama and the Dems?"

While I really like Edwards on personality and charisma - I think he would be a really odd choice for AG. He's a former "TRIAL ATTORNEY" - the great scourge of the legal system. Even removing the resume baggage, it's a strange fit. He's all about oratory and inspiration, which isn't what that office is usually about - Ashcroft, Reno, Gonzalez, Ed Meese: not a thrilling bunch. Can you imagine Edwards getting fired up to draft a memo on interstate commerce law and internet based businesses. I could see him being brought in to reorganize Homeland Security/FEMA - which has a more "people" focused mission and has been criticized for not being responsive enough and being a sink-hole for wasted tax dollars.

As much as I appreciated Clark coming out in 2004 and being a "general against the war", I think he's a pretty thin prospect. He wasn't particularly popular under Clinton and I remember there was some type of controversy regarding his command. I think he represented a moment of desperation for Democrats when he emerged on the presidential scene. It would have been different if he had been of the stature of Colin Powell - but Clark led military campaigns in Bosnia and Kosovo that weren't viewed as resounding successes - so he doesn't necessarily give the ticket the protection on defense issues that you would expect from a retired general/VP.


Bush has been fired, but security never showed up to escort him down to HR, so he's just telling everyone what he REALLY thinks of them.

[millerjake30]

Edwards should write his own patriotic ballad...he'll perform it on the CBS evening news, and if we approve, he may be the AG.