Too bad for you that the people who are supposed to be offended don't actually seem to mind the statement.
Way to post something completely wrong. That article is hilarious, and inaccurate on almost every count. Obama's bi-partisan bills from the Senate have been listed including those that past. This guy must not have even done the most precursory of research before writing this piece of no validity. Yeah, there's not one "spec of evidence" except all the bi-partisan bills he's sponsored, and those that have passed and been signed into law. It's hilarious. This guy is done as bad a job writing that article as I've seen in a long time. Pagbriel nailed the dubious stereotype claim already. Funny stuff. Please keep it coming.
Even I'll admit that this is probably not going to save Clinton and barring a massive Clinton victory in PA Obama has the momentum to win the nomination. The bigger problem for Obama is that this puts a hole in his image as being a uniter and opens up a path of attack by Republicans in the general.
The problem is that we are still mostly looking at the impact on this among Democrats. This might have a much larger impact on the general in regard to somewhat socially conservative independents.
To say the least. That hole is GAPING. Heck, it's big enough for Samkon freaking Gado to pick up 10 yards in...
Defending Obama, Clinton and McCain proves we are a nation of sheep who follow party politics. If the Dems were running Lindsey Lohan out there and the Republicans were running Paris Hilton as their candidate... you all would be spouting the same silly debates. (Having convinced yourselves blindly of their virtues.) Is Hillary an elitist? Of course! Is Barak? Most definately! Is McCain? Without a doubt! You don't get the nomination unless you are an elitist or you are in their pocket. Face it politicians today are just faces that can win an election and carry out the agenda of the wealthy. The state of American politics is much like Rome in the 5th century- fighting political wars around the globe with troops stationed everywhere, high debt and govt. spending, and a massive political bueracracy that appeased the wealthy who profited from politics. By the mid-400's Rome was crippled by immigration issues and public dole. Politicians voted to stay in power regardless of the problems they created. Rome fell, all empires do fall eventually. I am pretty negative on politics these days. Anyone who wants to keep increasing the debt (and all 3 candidates will) is anti-American in my mind. IMO- we are facing the most severe financial correction since the GD, within the next 5-10 years. It makes me sad. Nothing destroys a nation like massive debt. That has been the one key issue for me in the last several elections. Bush was a traitor for his rape of the economy. No need to mince words in D&D.
But so far the people it was supposed to divide, haven't really seemed too divided going by the reception Hillary and Obama got in PA yesterday. I think it's too early to tell. It seems like what he was saying though goes into trying to unite and include the people who have become bitter, rather than dividing.
Sorry I didn't see this yet when I posted my last response. It may be able to be spun into something derisive, which it never was intended, but I doubt it. Talking about how candidates react in crisis and under pressure during the campaign is important, and so far Obama has handled these types of things fairly adroitly. I think so much will happen between now and the months we have until the general election campaign begins that this will barely be remembered, and I think it is the kind of thing that Obama has proved able to handle. It seems like a big issue now, because it's in the news, but as time goes on it's apparent significance will fade, especially if the issue doesn't gain any traction right now. There will be bigger issues and ones that are more fresh in people's minds to do deal with once the general election rolls around.
Well Bill Clinton did bring down the deficit and Bush immediately gave it away to the wealthier segments of society as he admitted a couple of times. So your odds of helping the debt are better with Clinton. Obama has at least talked about raising some capital gains taxes and decreasing Iraq War costs. McCain on the other hand is for the Bush status quo, low or even lower taxes with high defense spending. This leads to more debt. Anybody know if other advanced countries are piling up debt the way we are?
Man there's sad truth in that. All the candidates are more like eachother then any of them are like most of of the people who will elect them.
How can you say this after Hillary was drinking shots in a bar with the common man, and talking about how much she likes to shoot guns.
the problem for O'bama is that he's run as "different" and an agent of "change." when he's revealed to be just more of the same, the backlash is particularly severe, and IMHO, will fatal to his campaign. there's no substance to fall back on, and those who have not fully imbibed the koolaid will feel betrayed.
Actually he's run a remarkably different campaign, with a different tone, and this is on top of having well defined policy positions and a productive senate record to boot. I'm waiting to see the backlash you are talking about. So far we haven't really seen it despite people trying to spin what he said as being so horrible. Things Obama has done differently in his campaign: Raise money from small contributors - not in debt to big money. He's the first candidate ever to have more than 1,000,000 donors during this primary season. The average contribution is around only $100. Focus on things that people have in common. In his senate career he's worked in a bi-partisan fashion, and has some real accomplishments crafted with GOP congressmen. He speaks to themes and issues that many people have in common rather than how one side his bad, and his ideas are good. Look at the debates. Usually the audience doesn't boo when one candidate attacks the other. But that wasn't the case when Hillary attacked Obama. Her attacks have brought about boos from the audience, because Obama has excited people to want and expect a different tone. So far it's been successful Defends himself from attacks and spin - unlike Democrats in past elections when he's attacked, Obama has proven adept at answering charges quickly with common sense. Thus the silly "bitter" charges that have been leveled at him recently brought about "boos" from the attacker, and applause for Obama. Obama's campaign is one that has fought back but rarely initiated attacks and never initiated personal ones unlike other campaigns we've seen in the past. He hasn't been 100% on this in some of the debates, but his campaign has worked hard and cut loose people "immediately" when this policy hasn't been followed. It's been very refreshing. Furthermore he could have played the racial victim game several times, but has worked tirelessly and gone out of his way to elevate the debate above that. Looking at Hillary's campaign they've tried multiple times to drag the level of discussion down into the mud, but Obama hasn't taken the bait. It's been admirable to watch. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Attempts to characterize Obama as same 'ol same 'ol and have failed. His pastor said some insane things(Obama removed him) Person on his campaign called Hillary a monster(She was immediately removed.) Obama talked about bitterness resulting in clinging to guns religion and antipathy towards other groups.(I'm not sure how that's politics as usual even if the spin people have put on it was true, but it isn't.) Obama's campaign isn't perfect by any means, and they've made mistakes as he's pointed out. But it is a far cry from politics as usual, and has been a cut above most of what we've seen from the candidates lately.
He's down by 20 in one flawed poll that has already been exposed. I think the average of polls already had Obama down in PA, and Hillary winning. Furthermore conventional wisdom was that the polls were overly generous in Obama's favor even then. Even after the silly bitter distraction Hillary supporter Ed Rendell was saying that a six point margin would be huge for Hillary. So he's not really convinced that the backlash is that substantial. He also said that Obama could win PA in the general election if he was the nominee. It may be substantial in one state for one period of time, but even that isn't proving to be true so far.
Obama increases National lead -- Gallup: Obama Has His Biggest Lead Yet, No "Small Town" Damage By Eric Kleefeld - April 15, 2008, 1:12PM Today's Gallup tracking poll gives Barack Obama an 11-point lead over Hillary Clinton, his widest margin ever in Gallup's polling. Here are the numbers, compared to yesterday: Obama 51% (+1) Clinton 40% (+0) The poll was conducted entirely after the "small town" controversy first erupted, a further indication that the whole flap has yet to actually harm Obama's poll numbers. http://www.gallup.com/poll/106537/Gallup-Daily-Obama-51-Clinton-40.aspx
