Letters to the Editor
-
@W.E.S.
Hard cheese old boy.
-
Finally
Great, now that it's official that Clinton's last minute desperation attack has failed.
She needs to quit.
-
hmm
So Obama faces the biggest shitstorm of his career and comes out virtually unscathed? I'm beginning to think he's got a bit of the ol' Billy Clinton teflon on him!
-
I'm pleasantly surprised: Obama's most difficult period to date appears not to have changed the basic dynamics of the race.
The PEW findings:
"[T]he Wright controversy does not appear to have undermined support for Obama's candidacy. The latest nationwide survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted March 19-22 among 1,503 adults, finds that Obama maintains a 49% to 39% advantage over Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination, which is virtually unchanged from than the 49% to 40% lead he held among Democrats in late February. Obama and Clinton continue to enjoy slight advantages over John McCain in general election matchups among all registered voters.
"The new polling suggests that the Wright affair has not hurt Obama's standing, in part because his response to the controversy has been viewed positively by voters who favor him over Clinton. Obama's handling of the Wright controversy also won a favorable response from a substantial proportion of Clinton supporters and even from a third of Republican voters.
Of course, there are these voters (the "Ferraro block"?):
"[W]hite Democrats who hold unfavorable views of Obama are much more likely than those who have favorable opinions of him to say that equal rights for minorities have been pushed too far; they also are more likely to disapprove of interracial dating, and are more concerned about the threat that immigrants may pose to American values. In addition, nearly a quarter of white Democrats (23%) who hold a negative view of Obama believe he is a Muslim.
On the other hand, NBC/WSJ finds the following:
"Both [Sen. Clinton] and Sen. Obama showed five-point declines in positive ratings from white voters. But where she is viewed mostly negatively, by 51% to 34% of whites, Sen. Obama's gets a net positive rating, by 42% to 37%. Among all voters, he maintained a significant positive-to-negative score of 49% to 32% -- similar to Sen. McCain's 45% to 25%.
And finally:
"The negativity of the Obama-Clinton contest seems to be hurting Sen. Clinton more, the poll shows. A 52% majority of all voters says she doesn't have the background or values they identify with. By comparison, 39% say that of Sen. Obama, and 32% of Sen. McCain.
-
45% = united?
The Journal/NBC poll shows Hillary Clinton and Obama tied, with each having the support of 45 percent of registered Democratic voters..."
"Obama maintains a 49 percent to 39 percent advantage over Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination..."
And that makes sense, how? Tied for support but 10% lead for the nomination?
At any rate, 45% support amoungst your own party is nothing to crow about, especially if your platform is based on being the "uniter".
Also based on campaign contributions any idea why the 45% Obama supporters more easily part with their cash than the 45% Clinton supporters?
-
huh
""[W]hite Democrats who hold unfavorable views of Obama are much more likely than those who have favorable opinions of him to say that equal rights for minorities have been pushed too far; they also are more likely to disapprove of interracial dating, and are more concerned about the threat that immigrants may pose to American values. In addition, nearly a quarter of white Democrats (23%) who hold a negative view of Obama believe he is a Muslim."
That doesn't sound very Democrat to me...
really?!? There are *actually* people who still disapprove of Interracial Dating?!?! Honestly?!!?
I gotta say, that one surprised me. I figured "miscegenation" was a word that was relegated to the dustbin of history. That's kinda depressing...sigh.
-
Yes, depressing to most Democrats...
...just not those in the Clinton campaign. Her "southern strategy" will continue.
-
You all assume a radical black nationalist is a bad thing
Why is that? We've had the reverse of that long enough and it hasn't worked out. Lets try an angry exclusionist black anti white anti jewish militant movement for a change. Then after 8 years of that we'll be able to sum up whether it's entirely bad or not. It can't be any worse.
-
@Electro Robot
re: You all assume a radical black nationalist is a bad thing
For some reason when I read that subject line it made me think of that Richard Pryor SNL skit, ("Dead Honkey!!")
thanks for the smile!
cheers
-
@ debaser
Yes, there are some people, white Democrats even, who walk with their knuckles scraping the ground.
-
Better late than never
Got some more catching up to, War Room, but this is a decent start. Joan must be off today.
-
Voters won't be suckered punched -this time.
National polls showed Clinton up by about 7 points during the peak of 24/7 Wright coverage-- but Obama shot back up as soon as the dust cleared.
That's the mark of a true winner.
-
@sajwan: confused?
At any rate, 45% support amoungst your own party is nothing to crow about, especially if your platform is based on being the "uniter".
I don't understand your point. Hillary and Obama are both strong candidates. Each beat out all the others and each racked up millions of voters. A lot of people still think Hillary can win and/or should stay in. This point seems to reflect that fact. This is what is true now.
If Obama wins the nomination and then only gets 45% support, then there'll be trouble in River City.
-
The Polls Didn't Change
because Obama hit the proverbial ball out of the park with that speech. Did it again on economic policy, IMO. If people want to hurl more "gotcha" issues at him, I'm sure he's open for business.
Although the primary election is close, people are going overboard on the divisive effect of the primary process. Most of these threads are stoked by PAID partisan hacks and I believe most Democrats facing a prospective McCain presidency, will gladly vote for whoever wins the Democratic nomination.
Look at the Clinton/Obama economic policy prescriptions and then look at McCain's. There's no way a significant percentage of Democrats are changing to McCain or not voting in this critical general election.
-
This is good news, however...
I'd say it's good news that the Wright diversion didn't change the Dem prospects -- how depressing it would be had the first viable black candidate for president been the first candidate torn down for simply being associated with someone who used the "wrong tone" in addressing real issues.
But the frame of the news is still a little troubling. "Despite this major scandal, Obama still polling okay." This frame just as easily could have been: "voters reject smear on Obama," or "media issue is not necessarily a voter issue," or "Clinton exaggerations offset any gains she made due to media's focus on Wright."
Wright got way more attention than Clinton's lie, which is shameful (one was based on the words of an associate, the other on the words of the candidate herself -- regarding an issue at the center of her case for electability). Yet these reports on the polling are framed solely as Obama dodging a Wright bullet. At the very least, the news is that the public has repudiated this media smear -- not that Obama is lucky.