Letters to the Editor
-
Bulls***T
It shows no such thing unfortunately. Over and over we see that Obama's appeal is fairly limited to very young people (8% Of the electorate but only in heavily populated states IF they vote), affluent white liberal men, and blacks voting for blacks.
Which states are you talking about? Maine? Idaho? Nebraska? Kansas? Iowa? There sure are a lot of rich white men or blacks voting for blacks among these states. What about Alaska? Do you even know which states are considered "affluent"?
I'm sorry you can't admit it but the demographics have varied from state to state in this contest, and no one but someone with no sense of fair play or objectivity would say that either Clinton or Obama have shown "crossover" appeal to demographics other than the ones they're supposed to win. For example, Obama won by wider margins in white and poor states this weekend than he did in Lousiana. So the armchair punditry isn't working for you. Maybe you should take up a sport (that is if you can bear not winning). Ping pong? Or is that too latte liberal for you?
-
@Xanandu
If you know so well in your heart and your soul that you're correct, then you'd be willing to put a name to your words.
Ok. I'm Tanandu. Meaningful, huh. Now troll on away.
-
Food For Thought...For Anybody Who Cares
Here are excerpts from a Washington Post article in Sunday's paper by Douglas Schoen. Schoen isn't exactly a "liberal" Democrat, but he raises a very good point.
Here is the link to his article (and excerpts):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/08/AR2008020803270.html?hpid%3Dopinionsbox1&sub=AR
The most immediate beneficiary of the RAMs' dissatisfaction with American politics has, of course, been Barack Obama -- as shown on Super Tuesday, when he won in a swath of red states across the country. The Illinois senator's extraordinary challenge to Hillary Clinton, the spouse and political partner of the most popular and important Democratic president since Franklin D. Roosevelt, testifies to a widespread yearning for post-partisan problem-solving, even among Democratic stalwarts.
But while Obama deserves credit for recognizing voters' yearning for nonpartisanship, he has thus far failed to engage fully with the concerns of the anxious moderates, particularly when it comes to their fears about the slumping economy. Independent and independent-minded voters desperately want a candidate with a track record as a problem-solver...Obama has so far offered mainly vague promises of transcendence.
...Hillary Clinton, offers the opposite: a proven track record and a variety of specific policy prescriptions, without the promise of systemic, overarching change. To win, she will have to make clear her commitment to changing the "culture of Washington" and to continued bipartisan problem-solving, of the type she has pursued since she was elected to the Senate in 2000..."
-
Food For Thought II
Others may have already seen Paul Krugman's article elsewhere. I read it today in NYT. Here is link to the article and a couple of excerpts:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/11/opinion/11krugman.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
…“I won’t try for fake evenhandedness here: most of the venom I see is coming from supporters of Mr. Obama, who want their hero or nobody. I’m not the first to point out that the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality. We’ve already had that from the Bush administration — remember Operation Flight Suit? We really don’t want to go there again.
..."What’s particularly saddening is the way many Obama supporters seem happy with the application of “Clinton rules” —the term a number of observers use for the way pundits and some news organizations treat any action or statement by the Clintons, no matter how innocuous, as proof of evil intent.”…
-
talk abut some faulty language.
Which states are you talking about?
So you're maintaing that a Dem candidate can win Idaho and Kansas and Nebraska? HHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH. you ARE funny. And really young too I bet, right?
1. Idaho: solidly red state. home of the Aryan Nations. large Mormom population. the only Democratic area of Idaho is one college county - it even went blue for Kerry, but Idaho sure isn't going to go to any Democrat.
2. Kansas: solidly republican state with a very moderate Dem Gov. Democrats in the state are blacks from Kansas City or former moderate Republicans that reregistered as Democrats when the Kathleen Seblius courted them into the party 3 years ago. (moderate country-club Republicans ("mods") and rightwing populists had been fighting for control of the party for years and the "cons" won so the mods changed to Dem and ran as Dems to regain power
With a moderate Republican like McCain to vote for they assuredly will not vote for an untested neo-liberal.
No Dem likely to win Kansas.
3. Nebraska: unlikely to go Democratic either way, probably a state where nobody but liberals went out to vote in the primary.
4. Iowa - don't know why Obama won there, but since they also chose John Kerry in 2004, I wouldn't put a whole lot of faith in them. Neither Kerry nor Gore won Iowa.
5. I discount Maine becuase by the time of their primary the entire press had run highly flawed articles stating Obama could beat McCain.
Nebraska? Kansas? Iowa?
Yeah, and with the exception of Iowa IF you don't run some super-liberal kneejerk (read Obama) you might become President yourself before a Dem wins them.
-
the worst thing
..."What’s particularly saddening is the way many Obama supporters seem happy with the application of “Clinton rules” —the term a number of observers use for the way pundits and some news organizations treat any action or statement by the Clintons, no matter how innocuous, as proof of evil intent.”…
I think the worst part is I'm beginning to hate them just as much back. Course that's no doubt what Rove intended.
-
still anal after all these posts
Who's the lady with a 47% disapproval rating? MIcehelle Obama? Or Billary? She's the energizer bunny for the fascist base. They love to hate her; I wish this were not true. She's done nothing to deserve it. But there it is. She is the only candidate in the Democratic field who could lose to McCain, except Mike Gravel. Dodd, Biden, Edwards, anybody. Not her. Loser. Not her fault, but loser.