http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080320/ts_nm/usa_politics_gallup_dc I guess America finally realized that Obama is black.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/wrights_rantings_wont_sink_oba.html Wright's Rantings Won't Sink Obama By Dick Morris Will the Gospel According to Jeremiah Wright sink the Obama candidacy? Not very likely. Let's start with two basic facts: (a) Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) has already won the Democratic nomination. It's over. Regardless of how the remaining primaries and caucuses go, including Michigan and even Florida, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) can never catch Obama in elected delegates. His current lead of 170 pledged delegates will not be overcome no matter what happens. Even if Clinton beats him by 10 points in each of these primaries, he will still lead among elected delegates by over 100. The superdelegates will not override the will of the voters unless Obama is in jail. They will not let themselves in for a civil war by overruling a black man who is beloved by the young by going over the heads of the electorate and naming the candidate that lost the primaries as the nominee. Regardless of how damaged Obama may be by the Wright tapes, it will not provide sufficient cover or cause for them to do so. (b) Wright's rantings are not reflective of Obama's views on anything. Why did he stay in the church? Because he's a black Chicago politician who comes from a mixed marriage and went to Columbia and Harvard. Suspected of not being black enough or sufficiently tied to the minority community, he needed the networking opportunities Wright afforded him in his church to get elected. If he had not risen to the top of Chicago black politics, we would never have heard of him. But obviously, he can't say that. So what should he say? He needs to get out of this mess with subtlety, the kind Bill Clinton should have used to escape the Monica Lewinsky scandal -- but didn't. As the controversy continues, Americans will gradually realize that Obama stuck by Wright as part of a need to get ahead. They will chalk up to pragmatism why he was so close to such a preacher. As they come to realize that Obama doesn't agree with Wright but used him to get started, they will be more forgiving. While he lets this fact sink in, he needs to continue to distance himself from Wright by characterizing that kind of anger and animosity as a thing of a generation past. He needs to compare the progress of which whites are proud in discarding the racism of our forebears with his own pride at being a post-racial candidate. He needs, again and again, to reject what Wright says and emphasize his belief in America and the validity and morality of the American Dream. As the controversy matures, he can increasingly depict those who fan its flames as trying to live in the past and re-fight the civil wars of race that have divided America. All these themes were evident and articulately presented in Obama's Tuesday speech on race. What Obama needs not to do is to resort to the kind of Clintonian fudging that animated his interview with Keith Olbermann. By saying "I wasn't there" and "I didn't know" and "I didn't hear him say it," he will invite contempt and derision. If he were to continue in that vein, he would buy himself a controversy akin to that which drowned John Kerry in the facts and allegations of his service in Vietnam. People will surface to say, "I sat next to him, and Wright said such and such," and Obama will be hostage to everybody's subjective memory. But if he handles the situation with subtlety and lets what he cannot say -- that it was opportunism that led him to stay in that church -- sink in among the electorate, he can and will survive this battle. And let's remember one other thing: The Democrats will increasingly realize that he will be their nominee and, in continuing this battle, they are eating their own.
I am afraid Hillary has already sunk the democrats. Obama is in for a long fight because that daffy woman would not concede to the inevitible, instead choosing to hurt her own party for a few more useless delegates.
Well, superdelegates are designed to "fix" this. Oh. From the other thread, I learned Rick Morris is the guy who spread the rumor that Clinton started this Wright controversy. I think I can understand the motivation behind this piece.
Do I expect Hillary to win? Of course not. But with that said, I'm pretty sure that in Dick Morris' mind, Hillary is singularly responsible for Sept. 11, Hurricane Katrina, global warming, the downturn in the economy, and every other negative event in the history of the world. Obama is clearly the favorite and this doesn't change that -- however, Dick Morris is a foaming at the mouth, raging lunatic when it comes to Hillary Clinton. Nothing he says should be posted in any kind of serious context.
The favorite? in the General? http://rasmussenreports.com/public_...ial_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Thursday shows John McCain’s lead growing against both potential Democratic opponents. McCain currently leads Barack Obama 49% to 42% and Hillary Clinton 51% to 41% margin (see recent daily results). African-American support for Clinton has collapsed, falling to 55% in the general election match-up. So much for UNITING people Obama
OK Hillary is as competent as any of the candidates, but I just don't think I can live with the anti-Hillary crowd for four years. She's just such an easy target for Fox and the comic critics. No matter what she does it will be just as uncomfortable as living with Bush. I'm just sick of it. I want a president that commands respect.
I like when you post the exact same posts in two different threads calling out one specific candidate and then tell us you're really undecided on it all.
I agree as far as pledged delegates are concerned. Do you know the superdelegate gains from both candidates since the Wright controversy? I suspect it will now make it harder for some superdelegate to pledge for Obama.
Rasmussen is a terrible polling firm, by the way. And yes, I meant for the Democratic nomination. That said, yes Obama is the favorite in the general, and it's not even close. This happens every election cycle when a primary is closely contested. Thousands of Clinton voters swear they won't vote for Obama if she doesn't get the nomination. But when push comes to shove, and they have months to detach from the heat of the moment, they'll align behind the other candidate with an almost identical platform. Happens all the time. I could care less what the numbers say -- it's natural given the state of the Democratic race. But look at the Democratic vs. Republican turnout. That's all you need to know. McCain has as much of a chance against Obama or Clinton as Belmont does against Duke tonight.
Clinton Facing Narrower Path to Nomination http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/us/politics/20memo.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
The problem with this line of thinking is somehow believing that the Republicans wouldn't have gone after Obama's association with Wright in the general. To blame Clinton for going after Obama is like blaming the Lakers for ruining the Rox win streak by not starting Kobe so the Rox would be rested up to face the Celitics. Wright was out there and sooner or later the Wright issue would've been exploited. Its better it happens now when Obama, if he wins the nomination, still has a chance to address this and recover.
