from MTV.com:
Please keep the focus on Obama's leadership on veterans' issues overall. His policies far outpace Sen. McCain's. Sam Graham-Feldstein's blog entry on MYBO lays out many of the details.
Showing posts with label west virginia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label west virginia. Show all posts
Monday, May 12, 2008
countering Clinton's "Southern Strategy"
From Time Magazine:
“Barack Obama had not been in politics for long when he got his tail whipped by a veteran Chicago Congressman in his own backyard in the 2000 US Congressional race. Obama couldn't win any of the black vote. The only ward he won was the White, Working-class Irish Catholic ward: a conservative community of cops, firefighters and schoolteachers. He took three-quarters of this vote.”
In addition, over 14 million WHITE people have voted for Obama. Why are the media trying to make this into a racial fight when it is not? Because Hillary said so? He won Iowa, one of the whitest states in the union!
File under "Card, comma, Race"
New levels of snark, dished up by Paul Begala on Tuesday night! Donna Brazile sets him straight...
From The NY Times column "The Caucus":
As if the divisions between race and gender in the Democratic Party hadn’t been further exposed through Tuesday night’s exit polls — and by a very heated exchange on CNN between Donna Brazile and Paul Begala — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s interview with USA Today on Wednesday is further mining those tense depths.
Audio of the interview is here:
While she said her remarks weren’t meant to be divisive, they’re already whipping around the Internet. “These are the people you have to win if you’re a Democrat in sufficient numbers to actually win the election. Everybody knows that,” she said in the interview. (Hint, hint, message to the superdelegates still undeclared.)
In Indiana alone, six in 10 white voters went for Mrs. Clinton, where she narrowly won the primary.
Bill Burton, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, told the newspaper that Mr. Obama had made inroads in Tuesday’s contests. And he added that her comments “are not true and frankly disappointing.”
On Tuesday night, we mentioned the dustup between two Democratic pundits, Ms. Brazile and Mr. Begala, who engaged in a prime-time debate about the coalitions being built by Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton. Mr. Begala, a Clinton supporter, said the party could not win in November with just “eggheads and African-Americans,” that the party could not ignore white middle-class voters. Ms. Brazile, who said she was not “undecided but undeclared” when it came to her choice for a candidate, shot back that Mr. Begala’s notions were dividing the party. (And that she’d chugged down many a beer with Joe and Jane “six-pack” in an effort to woo white voters.)
We’re revisiting their spirited exchange to demonstrate how divided party loyalists are right now.
UPDATE, 5/12/08:
Peggy Noonan's recent column in the Wall Street Journal centers on the Begala/Brazile dustup. An excerpt:
From The NY Times column "The Caucus":
As if the divisions between race and gender in the Democratic Party hadn’t been further exposed through Tuesday night’s exit polls — and by a very heated exchange on CNN between Donna Brazile and Paul Begala — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s interview with USA Today on Wednesday is further mining those tense depths.
“I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on,” she said in the interview, citing an article by The Associated Press.
It “found how Senator Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”
“There’s a pattern emerging here,” she said.
Audio of the interview is here:
While she said her remarks weren’t meant to be divisive, they’re already whipping around the Internet. “These are the people you have to win if you’re a Democrat in sufficient numbers to actually win the election. Everybody knows that,” she said in the interview. (Hint, hint, message to the superdelegates still undeclared.)
In Indiana alone, six in 10 white voters went for Mrs. Clinton, where she narrowly won the primary.
Bill Burton, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, told the newspaper that Mr. Obama had made inroads in Tuesday’s contests. And he added that her comments “are not true and frankly disappointing.”
On Tuesday night, we mentioned the dustup between two Democratic pundits, Ms. Brazile and Mr. Begala, who engaged in a prime-time debate about the coalitions being built by Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton. Mr. Begala, a Clinton supporter, said the party could not win in November with just “eggheads and African-Americans,” that the party could not ignore white middle-class voters. Ms. Brazile, who said she was not “undecided but undeclared” when it came to her choice for a candidate, shot back that Mr. Begala’s notions were dividing the party. (And that she’d chugged down many a beer with Joe and Jane “six-pack” in an effort to woo white voters.)
We’re revisiting their spirited exchange to demonstrate how divided party loyalists are right now.
UPDATE, 5/12/08:
Peggy Noonan's recent column in the Wall Street Journal centers on the Begala/Brazile dustup. An excerpt:
In case you didn't get what was behind that exchange, Mrs. Clinton spent this week making it clear. In a jaw-dropping interview in USA Today on Thursday, she said, "I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on." As evidence she cited an Associated Press report that, she said, "found how Sen. Obama's support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me."
White Americans? Hard-working white Americans? "Even Richard Nixon didn't say white," an Obama supporter said, "even with the Southern strategy."
If John McCain said, "I got the white vote, baby!" his candidacy would be over. And rising in highest indignation against him would be the old Democratic Party.
To play the race card as Mrs. Clinton has, to highlight and encourage a sense that we are crudely divided as a nation, to make your argument a brute and cynical "the black guy can't win but the white girl can" is -- well, so vulgar, so cynical, so cold, that once again a Clinton is making us turn off the television in case the children walk by.
"She has unleashed the gates of hell," a longtime party leader told me. "She's saying, 'He's not one of us.'"
She is trying to take Obama down in a new way, but also within a new context. In the past he was just the competitor. She could say, "All's fair." But now he's the competitor who is going to be the nominee of his party. And she is still trying to do him in. And the party is watching.
Again: amazing.
Who can save the situation? The superdelegates.
You know them. They're the ones hiding under the rock, behind the boulder, and at the bar.
They are terrified, most of them. They want the problem to go away. They want it handled, but they don't want to do it. They don't want to tell Hillary to stop, because they would likely pay a price for it, and not just with her.
They are afraid of looking as if they're jumping on a train that's speeding down the tracks and is about to roll over the damsel in distress.
Which is how Hillary -- and her supporters -- will paint it. Even though she's no damsel, and she causes distress.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
West Virginia contact information
Obama has all but conceded West Virginia to Sen. Clinton. But there's still plenty of effort that can be made to help close the margin.
WV media contact list
Information about WV
Friday, May 9, 2008
Interesting delegate/superdelegate calculator
VERY illustrative...from the NY Times.
Real Clear Politics has this to say about the calculator:
Determining the degree to which Clinton can close the pledged delegate gap in the remaining primaries might lead the average Clinton supporter to be fairly skeptical of her chances at the nomination. The new New York Times Delegate Calculator (rereleased Monday) puts this in even greater perspective. It factors in the percentage of remaining super delegates Clinton would need to win assuming she receives a certain percentage of the remaining pledged delegates.
What does it reveal?
If Clinton were to win a generous 57 percent of the pledged delegates in the remaining states, she would still need 63 percent of the undecided super delegates remaining to win the nomination. Clinton won 53.7% of the pledged delegates from her Pennsylvania victory and 52.4% of the pledged delegates from her Ohio victory.
A more revealing way to put it would be that Obama could manage only 43% of the pledged delegates in the remaining primaries and still need only 38% of the undecided super delegates to back him.
Based on recent super delegate trends even after Obama’s most recent struggles, such a wave of Clinton support among super delegates appears to be quite a daunting task.
Monday, May 5, 2008
Olbermann on McClinton's pandering "Hail Mary pass" gas tax holiday plan
Here's a Newsweek article explaining why the gas tax "holiday" simply will not work...
UPDATE, 5/3/08:
Calitics.com estimates job losses of 20,000 or more in California alone if a gas tax holiday is implemented. Road workers are on payrolls, Sen. Clinton...and they can't just go out and make a few college speeches to make up the difference, like your hubby can.
Meanwhile, 200 economists have stood up against Sen. Clinton's gas plan. Not that she's listening.
UPDATE, 5/5/08:
Here's a new ad Obama is running on the gas tax issue:
FLIP the SCRIPT: The Bill Clinton Library is the beneficiary of a $10 million donation from the Saudis. Does that boost Sen. Clinton's credibility on energy policy?
Of course not. Which is why she's going on the attack against Obama instead. Here's her latest ad from Indiana:
Here's video of Barack on yesterday's Meet the Press. The differences between his policy and Sen. Clinton's couldn't be much clearer.
PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD!
Friday, May 2, 2008
Obama responds to Rev. Wright
Rev. Wright has finally exceeded the boundaries of Sen. Obama's tolerance.
Kudos to Obama for standing up to intolerance...even when it comes from a man who served as something of a father figure to Obama --- a man to whom Obama tried very hard to remain loyal over the past few months.
Tolerance is a wonderful thing. But tolerance of intolerance is something else altogether.
More clips on this topic here.
Excerpt:
"I want to use this press conference to make people absolutely clear that obviously whatever relationship I had with Rev. Wright has changed, he said. "I don't think he showed much concern for me ...and what we are trying to do in this campaign." "My reaction has more to do with what I want this campaign to be about.... in some ways, what Rev. Wright said yesterday directly contradicts everything that I've done during my life. It contradicts how i was raise and the setting in which I was raised; it contradicts my decision to pursue a career of public service. It contradicts the issues that I've worked on politically.
I'm outraged by the comments that were made and saddened by the spectacle that we saw yesterday. I have been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ since 1992 and have known Jeremiah Wright for almost 22 years. The person I saw yesterday was not the person I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but they also give comfort to those that prey on hate and I believe they do not accurately portray the perspective of the black church. They certainly do not accurately portray my values and beliefs. If Reverend Wright thinks that is political posturing on my part, he does not know me very well.
I have already denounced those comments that have come out of these previous sermons. I gave him the benefit of the doubt in my speech in Philadelphia, explaining that he has done enormous good in the church, has built a wonderful conversation. They are a wonderful people and what attracted me has always been the ministries reach beyond church walls. But when he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions, that the U.S. government is involved in AIDS, when he suggests that Louis Farrakhan represents one of the greatest voices of the 21st century, when he equates the United States' wartime effort with terrorism, then there are no excuses. They offend me, they rightfully offend all Americans, and they should be denounced. That is what I am doing very clearly and unequivocally here today.
I have spent my entire adult life trying to bridge the gap between different kinds of people. That's in my DNA, trying to promote mutual understanding to insist that we all share common hopes and common dreams as Americans and as human beings. That's who I am, that's what I believe, and that's what this campaign has been about."
UPDATE, 5/2/08
E.J. Dionne, noted commentator, had this to say about "false prophets".
Kudos to Obama for standing up to intolerance...even when it comes from a man who served as something of a father figure to Obama --- a man to whom Obama tried very hard to remain loyal over the past few months.
Tolerance is a wonderful thing. But tolerance of intolerance is something else altogether.
More clips on this topic here.
Excerpt:
"I want to use this press conference to make people absolutely clear that obviously whatever relationship I had with Rev. Wright has changed, he said. "I don't think he showed much concern for me ...and what we are trying to do in this campaign." "My reaction has more to do with what I want this campaign to be about.... in some ways, what Rev. Wright said yesterday directly contradicts everything that I've done during my life. It contradicts how i was raise and the setting in which I was raised; it contradicts my decision to pursue a career of public service. It contradicts the issues that I've worked on politically.
I'm outraged by the comments that were made and saddened by the spectacle that we saw yesterday. I have been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ since 1992 and have known Jeremiah Wright for almost 22 years. The person I saw yesterday was not the person I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but they also give comfort to those that prey on hate and I believe they do not accurately portray the perspective of the black church. They certainly do not accurately portray my values and beliefs. If Reverend Wright thinks that is political posturing on my part, he does not know me very well.
I have already denounced those comments that have come out of these previous sermons. I gave him the benefit of the doubt in my speech in Philadelphia, explaining that he has done enormous good in the church, has built a wonderful conversation. They are a wonderful people and what attracted me has always been the ministries reach beyond church walls. But when he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions, that the U.S. government is involved in AIDS, when he suggests that Louis Farrakhan represents one of the greatest voices of the 21st century, when he equates the United States' wartime effort with terrorism, then there are no excuses. They offend me, they rightfully offend all Americans, and they should be denounced. That is what I am doing very clearly and unequivocally here today.
I have spent my entire adult life trying to bridge the gap between different kinds of people. That's in my DNA, trying to promote mutual understanding to insist that we all share common hopes and common dreams as Americans and as human beings. That's who I am, that's what I believe, and that's what this campaign has been about."
UPDATE, 5/2/08
E.J. Dionne, noted commentator, had this to say about "false prophets".
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Sen. Clinton's energy policy: "self-serve"
According to the Washington Post (excerpt):
A growing chorus -- including a top congressional Democrat -- labeled Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's proposal for suspending the federal gasoline tax ineffective and shortsighted yesterday, even as she continued to paint Sen. Barack Obama as insensitive to drivers' woes for not endorsing the plan.
Obama spoke about how the proposed 3-month gas tax "holiday" would only result in a $30 savings for most households. A point that I think might be added into the mix is infrastructure. Perhaps we should pull out some video of last year's Minnesota bridge collapse (pictured, above left)? Bridges and roads are in terrible shape nationwide. Suspending the gas tax would have a tiny effect on each taxpayer's wallet, but would have major implications for spending on infrastructure.
We have gargantuan amounts of work to do on the energy front. Band-aid measures like gas tax holidays will not get that work done --- plain and simple. How about a government SUV buy-back program instead? Offer drivers of the largest SUVs a chance to unload those monsters, because as it stands, NOBODY is buying them...particularly not the budget-minded shoppers in the used car market!
Obama is avoiding Clinton and McCain's pandering. (Pictured: Sen. Clinton riding with a "regular Joe" in a pickup truck to demonstrate the importance of car-pooling. She carpools all the time...pooling multiple cars to get her to her destination! She left the motorcade back at the hotel for a few minutes! Wouldn't it have made a better pojnt if she'd carpooled with a mom with her 2.2 kids on the way to daycare and work in her minivan, rather than a blue collar guy in his F-250 hemi?).
Once again, Obama refuses to just "tell us what we want to hear" because it would be popular. May it continue. As he said at a campaign speech this week:
"This isn't an idea designed to get you through the summer. It's an idea designed to get them through an election."
And some reaction from ABC news:
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Please support Rep. Chandler of Kentucky
Flak for endorsing Obama
A little preview of what rough states Kentucky and West Virginia -- the working-class white Appalachian heartland -- are going to be for Obama comes in reports of friction two of his major endorsers are getting.
Rep. Ben Chandler endorsed Obama yesterday , which got the phones ringing. Denis Fleming, Chandler's chief of staff, said that the congress man's offices in Lexington and Washington had received about 300 phone calls opposing his decision -- and only five in favor -- by about 2:30 p.m. yesterday.
Some of the calls, he said, were "racially insensitive," while other callers simply said that Chandler should have waited until after Kentucky's May 20 primary or should have endorsed Clinton. West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller's (extremely longshot) challenger is also taking shots at him over the endorsement, in an AP piece:
Fletcher says the clearest illustration of this disconnect is Rockefeller's decision to endorse Sen. Barack Obama in the Democratic presidential primary. ''It offended people,'' she said, and Rockefeller has drawn some criticism over the endorsement, although much of it from supporters of Obama's rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton.
These states were always going to be a low spot on the calendar for Obama; if Clinton's still alive next week, though, they'll constitute a particularly rough patch for him.
Please call Re. Chandler's office to thank him for his endorsement. Make sure to be upfront about not being one of his constituents if that's the case!
Contact info:
Chandler contact:
Washington, D.C. office
Phone: (202)-225-4706
Fax: (202)-225-2122
District Office for casework:
Phone: (859) 219-1366
Fax: (859) 219-3437
And now...
The moment (well, one of the moments) we've been waiting for...
SENATOR CLINTON's EARMARKS!
Yes, we all know she's "Queen of Pork", so there's probably not much that will be surprising here...other than "WOW, her EARMARKS ARE THREE TIMES MORE THAN ANY OTHER SENATOR'S" (yes, I'm shouting. Sorry.) The important thing is that she's finally done what Sen. Obama did months ago, and made her earmarks public.
Now...how about
The 2007 Clinton taxes?
The Clinton Library/Foundation donor list (the latter should be most interesting in these days of $3.50+/galon gasoline...plenty of Saudi money there)?
Returning the $800K in lobbying fees from the Colombians?
etc.
Fun facts for letters to the editor. The mainstream media is falling down on the job on covering these questions. Keep them on the front burner!
SENATOR CLINTON's EARMARKS!
Yes, we all know she's "Queen of Pork", so there's probably not much that will be surprising here...other than "WOW, her EARMARKS ARE THREE TIMES MORE THAN ANY OTHER SENATOR'S" (yes, I'm shouting. Sorry.) The important thing is that she's finally done what Sen. Obama did months ago, and made her earmarks public.
Now...how about
The 2007 Clinton taxes?
The Clinton Library/Foundation donor list (the latter should be most interesting in these days of $3.50+/galon gasoline...plenty of Saudi money there)?
Returning the $800K in lobbying fees from the Colombians?
etc.
Fun facts for letters to the editor. The mainstream media is falling down on the job on covering these questions. Keep them on the front burner!
Monday, April 28, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
