Hillary Slipping with Super Delegates Issues Beyond Palo Alto, posted by A Boomer, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Apr 18, 2008 at 4:23 pm
There is an article from today's NY Times that indicates that the recent rhetoric out of the Hillary Clinton campaign and the candidate herself, calling Obama elitist, out of touch, and otherwise unfit for office after his comments about rural voters in Pennsylvania may have backfired with the Super Delegates.
I did not get a chance to read the entire article, but what I gleaned from it was that:
--the super delegates see it for what it is, a distraction, a tempest in a tea pot; and their choice of either Hillary or Obama will be grounded in a deeper and more complete understanding of both candidates and the delegates' judgment of who is the more likely to succeed in November.
--going on the attack may work in retail politics--and that is not even clear at this point--but it does not serve Hillary well with this super delegate group. My own hunch is that it is leading to "Bill Fatigue" for many of them, as they think about the baggage and distractions that plagued the Clintons when he was President. Even though much of it was preposterous, it was there, and it appears some of the super delegates don't think there is enough upside choosing Hillary over Obama to offset a return of some of that Clinton Halo/Hangover.
--they just want this thing to be over. Hillary's lingering just prolongs it at this point, her chances of winning at the convention are closing in on zero, so why protract the contest?
Obama had some interesting things to say the day after the debate. The excerpts I heard were to the effect "We were 45 minutes into the debate before the subjects of Iraq, the economy, health care, and the big issues the country faces started getting disucssion." The implicit remark was a significant part of the early portions of the debate were on largely trivial and non-consequential matters when it comes to choosing the next President.
I think Obama's comments were deliberately calculated to the super delegate audience. In fact, much of the symbolic stuff, like flag lapel pins and having the ability to connect with everyday people are very important in a leader and in winning a general election. HIs campaign seems to know that they need to stay "in the moment," which right now means locking up as many super delegates as they can in the next couple of weeks. Deal with the retail politics stuff later, but win the nomination or you won't have a chance to deal with the retail stuff. It's an interesting calculus, we shall see how it plays out.
Posted by jr, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Apr 18, 2008 at 4:29 pm
The NYT is a sinking ship, Murdock will either buy it in a fire sale or destroy it with the new WSJ
The New York Times Company, the parent of The New York Times, posted a $335,000 loss in the first quarter — one of the worst periods the company and the newspaper industry have seen — falling far short of both analysts’ expectations and its $23.9 million profit in the quarter a year earlier.
Posted by pat, a member of the Ohlone School community, on Apr 18, 2008 at 4:54 pm
Unfortunately Bill Ayers is a big problem for Obama and it is not going away any time soon
I don't regret setting bombs,'' Bill Ayers said. ''I feel we didn't do enough.'' Mr. Ayers, who spent the 1970's as a fugitive in the Weather Underground, was sitting in the kitchen of his big turn-of-the-19th-century stone house in the Hyde Park district of Chicago.
the progressive wing of the democratic party is in a panic, because for the first time they are seeing their candidate savaged...what's amazing is that in spite of rampant sexism in the mainstream media against hillary, and the betrayal by the progressive left of her own party, that she is still close. she needs to take this all the way to the convention floor, because obama is already toast...he did not do well under attack in philly, so what's he gonna do in the fall? what bothers me about obama is that he is not what he says he is, and that his core group, the obamayouth, were in diapers when bill clinton was bailing out the democratic party from effete candidates and platforms. america is a centrist nation, as the dems will discover soon enough of they're foolish enough to nominate someone with no substantial record, and no history of leading anything...dem moderates will flee in droves if obama gets the dem nod. hang in there hillary
Posted by ol' lady, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Apr 19, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Clinton just passed Obama in national Demmocratic polls. Gallup, April 19,..Clinton 49%, Obama 48%.
As for Ayers and Obama: Imagine a Republican candidate who served on a volunteer Board with a convicted terrorist who has stated he wishes he had blown up more people, then accepted a campaign/fundraising party in his/her honor by the same terrorist.
Then tried to imply that the relationship was no more than one of living in the same neighborhood and running into each other once in a while...
Then, when busted, refused to say that what Ayers did was abominable. Because he was afraid since he was in the same neighborhood, perhaps? This is the kind of character and courage you would want in a President of the USA?
that is what is wrong with the Ayers/Obama connection.
If I was going to be stuck with a Democrat president, I used to hope it was Obama. That was when I knew nothing about him except that he seemed like a decent but horribly misguided far-left person. Which is the best that can be said of any far-left person who claims to value freedom and democracy.
Not any more. That guy is really poison. Very dangerous.
Posted by ol' lady, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Apr 19, 2008 at 6:02 pm
Did you know that Obama hasn't a clue about how our markets work? He just falls on the same ol' communist class rhetoric about "fairness" and "tax the rich". How do I know this?
The latest proof was in his response this week to the question of Capital Gains taxes. He has blown this question every time, and you would think that by now somebody would have explained to him what a fool he is making of himself.
He again said that he would only increase the taxes on capital gains for "the rich"..exhibiting that he is clueless about how the capital gains taxes are administered.
Why? He and Michelle have owned very little stock relative to most adult Americans ( 100,000,000) who actually own stock.
Oh, and he has never owned a business, 93% of which are small businesses owned by average Americans..so he hasn't a clue to how businesses work and how they are taxed. So he keeps going after "increase business taxes" as if business is the enemy. Hello, Barack, did you know the vast majority of America is employed by BUSINESSES, not government? ( Yet)
Granted, neither does McCain..at least with him there is hope of getting a VP who understands economics.