An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

« This Too Is West Virginia

Endurance, The Word: A Lost Story »

Clinton’s West Virginia Primary Win: Significant Or Meaningless?

Posted by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief in Politics.
May 13th, 2008 | Comments

It had been predicted all week that Senator Hilllary Clinton would win the West Virginia primary by a whopping margin. Some said such a victory, highlighting flaws in front-runner Senator Barack Obama’s coalition, could make Superdelgates think twice while others others said it would be too late. So what has changed?

Media reports generally echoed this article by McClatchy Newspapers:

Hillary Clinton clobbered Barack Obama in West Virginia Tuesday, but her late win in a small state likely did little to slow rival Barack Obama’s march toward the Democratic presidential nomination.

Clinton won the overwhelmingly white state in a walk — by a landslide margin of 2-1, according to exit polls — and used the results to argue that Americans shouldn’t count her out yet.

So did it mean something or not?

That clearly depends on who you support.

With the exception of professional political analysts who strictly point to the delegate numbers so far and what is need to win nomination, many Clinton’s supporters say the big win is a potential game changer, while Clinton’s foes and Obama supporters insist it doesn’t change the total picture.

A look at weblog opinion gives a good snap-shot of this passionate, polarizing race — a race where each side’s reality is the other side’s denial.

Here’s a cross section of differing blog opinion on Clinton’s win and what it means:

–Matthew Yglesias:

Her campaign is rescued from the dead. As the Clinton campaign sagely points out “no Democrat has won the White House without winning West Virginia since 1916″ and therefore Obama’s primary loss shows that despite his large lead in the polls over John McCain, he can’t possible win the election.

What’s even more interesting is that no Democrat has won the White House without carrying Minnesota since 1912 (it went for Teddy Roosevelt’s Bull Moose party) so given that Obama won Minnesota and Clinton won West Virginia, McCain is guaranteed to win the general election unless the eventual nominee can somehow completely replicate the social and political conditions prevailing in pre-WWI America.

–Andrew Sullivan:

My own sense is that WV voters are conservative and risk-averse and Obama suffered a great deal from unfamiliarity. Race compounded it; and if you listen to Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, you’re likely to believe that Obama is a Muslim, racist, terrorist communist… For what it’s worth, I felt her victory speech was pretty obviously angling for the vice-presidency. Cuomo just put his weight behind the idea. I’m not sure, whatever the objective merits of the case, I could bear listening to her any longer.

–Taylor Marsh:

Support Hillary!

No negotiation. All the way. Vice president? Keep it. Clinton’s in it to win it. You don’t like it? Beat her.

Obama hasn’t closed the deal. Period.

–Daily Kos:

But to give some perspective, Chuck Todd was just on MSNBC saying that there are 189 pledged delegates left after tonight. For Clinton to overtake Obama, she’d have to win 172 of those delegates or 91%. So congratulations on Hillary’s victory tonight, but it doesn’t matter. Barack Obama is the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party.

Remember New Hampshire? Rally, baby, it’s full steam ahead.

–Red State:

Big media outlets already calling it for Hillary. Take your bets here on the point spread. And drink every time an Obama supporter calls the state’s Democrats racists.

–My DD’s Jerome Armstrong:

Obama may not even break 30 percent, despite being practically anointed with the nomination?!?! Look, this is a partisan blog. Nearly everyone will come around to supporting the nominee here, but if Obama doesn’t recognize the serious problem this presents in the world offline, and his supporters as well, I am speechless (which may not be a bad thing considering).

–Pajamas Media’s Vodkapundit aka Stephen Green did his famous “live blogging” (a must read as always) and summarizes it this way:

Here it is: Hillary’s big, big win. The Obama camp will point out that West Virginia doesn’t really matter, because he already has the nomination all but sewn up, that it’s just a “distraction” from bigger contests, and that WV is filled with crackers, anyway. Although the language they’ll use will be a bit more discreet.

The Clinton campaign will say West Virginia matters, precisely because it’s filled with white people just like all the other white people who won’t vote for Obama in the fall. And that’s pretty much exactly the language they’ll use.

Meanwhile, race continues to be the determining factor in the formerly colorblind Democratic party…

–Townhall:

Perhaps Clinton just continues to rock on until June 3rd, then using the dual bargaining power of being both a potentially destructive annoyance to the party throughout the summer and the idea that the party owes her for having energized new voters and for her potential to keep blue-collar types within the ranks.

Does she settle on one of these bargaining chips– either the diligent party servant or the dangerous candidate scorned? I think we all know which might suit her better.

And, at what point is her bargaining power greatest? Does she ever lose her leverage, or are the Clintons so powerful that regardless of her behavior, she’s guaranteed a pay-out or a position at the end of all this? Thoughts, guys? The clock is a-tickin’ on this thing. Just thinking out loud.

–Slublog:

…Hillary Clinton is getting a pretty bad rap from the media following her win in West Virginia. At this time, it looks like she might win by as much as 30 points.

Sure, it may be all but impossible for her to win, but as Geraghty points out, Obama failed once again to attract the demographic he’s going to need to win key states in November. The superdelegates may be slowly moving Obama’s way, but the lack of overwhelming support indicates that many may still have doubts about his ability to win.

–A South Dakota Moderate:

Is this win in West Virginia really that tremendous considering the uphill battle Obama had to overcome based on the makeup of the population there? Well at least it will give us 2 more visits from the Clinton’s even despite their $20 million campaign shortfall and few prospects of getting the nomination.

–Blogs of War:

The real winner here is McCain. The exit polls and Obama’s incredibly poor performance here point to weaknesses that McCain can exploit. McCain can also continue to chill out while Hillary and Obama slug it out a while longer.

–Comments from Left Field:

And then I remember how much worse this could be, and that while all the spin and hysterical reporting and watching the Clinton supporters act as though this changes everything is annoying, it’s also quite necessary.

Yes, the more rabid the Clinton supporters seem, the more contentious the Clinton campaign comes off, the better.

Give me more.

Because as bad as a loss like this may appear, it would be a whole hell of a lot worse if Obama had lost this bad unopposed. Thus, nights like this are little more than an unpleasant necessity, a rough spot that must be endured while we wait for this contest to be officially over.

–Presidential Politics for America:

As predicted by everyone, Hillary Clinton is projected to win West Virginia by a large margin.

Hillary Clinton is currently giving a speech that is simply all of her talking points onto one piece of paper…Nothing new. So, in the spirit of Clinton, I will offer nothing new in this post. Nothing has changed. Refer to today’s post to see where she goes from here.

–Dispatches from Seth Gitell:

Hillary Clinton just trounced Barack Obama in West Virginia. She’s giving a fired up speech from Charleston. And she’s not going anywhere.

I’m struck by the crowd in the background, all white except for an African American dude in a doo-rag. They’ve also got some kind of doofus in a windbreaker holding a bowling pin aloft.

I’ve admired Clinton’s fighting spirit for much of this campaign. On stylistic grounds, it’s almost bordering on self-parody.

–American Girl In Italy:

She won in every category. Clean sweep. Way to go West Virginia!
I would like to just revel in the victory for a day, but I don’t think there is time…..It just demonstrates why so many Hillary supporters are mad as hell, and aren’t going to take it anymore!

–Oliver Willis:

Hey, they found the one black guy in West Virginia to stand behind Clinton. What are the odds?

Cartoon by Larry Wright, The Detroit News

Ads by Project Wonderful! Your ad here, right now: $0

ryan

This victory matters in the same way that it matters when a non-playoff team blows out the playoff-bound team in sports - it's a moral victory that doesn't change anything. Clinton's supporters should rightly be proud of her tonight - this was a massive win (40% at present) and it shows that there is a huge percentage of Democrats who support her. However, Obama has won the majority of delegates, and as a result he will be the party's nominee. Clinton has put up a good fight, and if this was the sports world then the fans would (rightly) be fired up for next season. In the political world "next season" may never come, which is an unfortunate reality for her supporters.

Michael Merritt

I support Obama, but have a different outlook than you might expect of one. While this will have little overall effect in the nomination, the massive win tonight does outline Obama's biggest weakness: the white, blue collar voter. The more conservative Democrats. And while he has made some inroads into this demographic in some states, it's been baby steps compared to Clinton's huge lead there.

Here is a portion of the population that Obama needs if he wants a chance at winning the general election, whether Obama supporters want to admit it or not. If he doesn't get the ever-so-increasing working class vote, he doesn't get the Presidency. Period.

JSpencer

Actually I thought Townhall asked the relevant questions. What is Hillary really bargaining for? And does she deserve to get it?

As for the working class vote (and I've been working class most of my life), if they are foolish enough in November to reward the GOP, then they've learned nothing from the last 7 years.

mikkel

Dymero:

"It’s fair for the Obama camp to point out that he doesn’t do significantly worse against McCain among working-class whites than Clinton does, and that he does better with their upscale counterparts. And Obama’s numbers are nothing like John Kerry’s and Al Gore’s; they lost working-class whites to George W. Bush by 24 points and 17 points, respectively."

Lit3Bolt

Didn't you hear Jspencer? He's a half-breed and a Muslim. How can you trust that?

Despite Redstate pathetic attempts to marginalize it, racism is alive and well, except what's going to happen is suddenly everyone will become too "polite" to discuss it in the general election. Press and bloggers alike will soon grow tired of the issue, yawning "Raicsm? Oh don't get on that old hobby horse again! Everyone knows we defeated racism in the 60s after MLK was assassinated." Above all, one shouldn't confront the "hard working honest blue collar working" over his ignorance, petty thinking, or misinformed views because hey, they're the backbone of America, y'know? At least every 4 years, these mouth breathing sheeple in flyover country are important and we need to pander a little bit to them, and then we can go back to discussing important things like nuking Iran and dressing Muslim men in women's clothing.

So let's not talk about racism, and it'll go away. See how simple it is?

StockBoySF

I think what's important to keep in mind is that individual races don't count. At the end of the day it's how the whole country has voted. There are pockets/states with large white, blue collar workers, other states have large African American populations while other states have other sorts of folks. Obama may have trouble with certain groups of people (as does Hillary), but after all the Democratic primary races are completed Obama will still be ahead in popular vote and pledged delegates. As much as it would be nice for everyone to vote for Obama, that's never happened for any president.

The right question which has been asked time and again is if Obama (or Hillary) can beat McCain. Certainly there are certain groups of people who will vote for McCain over Obama (and lots of people will vote for Obama instead of McCain). I think it's clear that most Dems will vote for the Democratic candidate. I also think many Republicans and independents will also vote for Obama in more numbers than the past two elections simply because McCain will by and large represent a third Bush term, which few people support.

To win in Nov. McCain needs to convincingly show that he does not represent a third Bush term. But that will be difficult for McCain to pull off given his voting record and support of Bush's war of choice. Obama, on the other hand, has been pretty consistent in his positions, some of which he took against popular opinion.

Obama has been able to inspire people to vote like no other recent presidential candidate. At this time I think many Republicans will sit out the election, preferring neither McCain nor Obama (or Hill)- though this could change if McCain chooses a running mate that appeals to the religious right Republican base.

Lastly I think that the polls showing a close race between McCain and Obama (or Hillary) do not reflect what will happen in Nov. Many voters are sick of the Dems' drawn out primary and right now voters focus on McCain and support him, leaving the Dems out of their consideration. Once the dust from the Democratic primary settles and voters compare the positions of McCain with that of Obama (or Hillary), I think many of those voters will support the Dem nominee.

Lastly, one other observation.... there have been many articles written about Bill Clinton's influence on the the contests. Depending on his behavior, Bill has alternately hurt or helped his wife. But despite what is reported in the media and what people take away from those media reports, Bill is seen as a star by many people. Hillary, in other words, has had a star behind her and campaigning for her every step of the way. Michelle Obama may campaign for her husband, but she's no star compared to Bill. So this final observation is that I think it's amazing that Obama has been able to beat not only Hillary, but Bill as well, especially if you stop to consider that the Hillary campaign can effectively be in two places at once (Bill off campaigning in his neck of the woods and Hillary in hers). I think it speaks volumes about Obama's draw that he can hold his own against the Hillary campaign with its two very popular people and their greater number of campaign events. But even this "two against one" effect of the Billary campaign has not been able to stop Obama.

StockBoySF

For those people who say that Hillary's blowout win in WV is a big blow to Obama I'd like to point out this, which I just came across on the NY Times website (here's the link) on

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008...

Hillary won 2/3rds of the vote. This is the second time she won 2/3rds or greater in contests against Obama. The other state she carried was Arkansas.... by 70%. These are blow-out wins but....

Obama has won 12 (yes twelve) states by the same percentage (or more) that Hillary won tonight (at least as I write this- with some 92% of the WV vote in). Some of these states are pretty significant, too, including Colorado (Obama got 67%), Kansas (74%), Minnesota (66%), Alaska (75%) and Idaho (80%).

So before the Hillary-ites get excited about WV and spin this as "proof" that Obama is weak, the Hillary-ites need to be reminded of these other contests and explain why WV is more significant than these other 12 contests that voted for Obama in just as great, of not greater margins. Some of these states which went for Obama have double, nearly triple the number of delegates than WV....

runasim

I'm beginning to think that winning the 'hard-working white' vote will cost tthe Dems as a whole.
If a GOP candidate had used language like this and then gloried in the victory, the Dems would be pillarying the candidate and the GOP for racism.
IInstead, Dem Candidate Hillary is a hero in WV.

I think the Dem leadership made a mistake by not confrontign this head on, before the primary election. Now, it will never go away.

There is double standard issue here that will be exploited in the genreal election, I preict.

Reggie_55_USA

Rascism will not just go away. It can not go away because there are some politicians who need it as a rallying call.

Hillary closely referred to WV voters as buffoons and I guess that's OK as long as she is perceived by them as being one of "them."

This sad pocket of people represent remnants of bigotry, race hate, and social and economic paranoia. They are an insecure people who totally surrender their consent to manipulation by politicians, religious leaders, FOX "news" and radio talk show hosts; these are people who must be told what to think. These are people who have nothing but are easily led to believe that someone is going to take from them.

When the Clinton's sat their campaign down in the bedrock of KKK country and staked out their exclusive claim tothe Klan there they marked a moment in their own political history and it is from here, they will never be able to recover.

From here, the Clinton's must dance with the ones who brung them but 21st century America has no need for either of them.

For what the WV primary has exposed, it was a good night for America.

StockBoySF

"If a GOP candidate had used language like this and then gloried in the victory, the Dems would be pillarying the candidate and the GOP for racism."

I agree- I can't help but wonder if people aren't going after Hillary more because Obama is seen as the preumptive nominee and going after Hill just doesn't accomplish anything. Perhaps folks are tolerating her because she's seen as irrelevant at this point. I find myself increasingly dismissive of what she says.... though I won't consider Obama the victor until he truly is.

Any thoughts?

Silhouette

Originally I was for Obama. I liked his verve, his appeal and his real passion for what he believes in. It was a hard choice but I started looking at Hillary who has not only the same amount of passion (maybe a little mellowed.. older and wiser, that sort of thing), but has done a lot of what she's talked about. That sunk in a little deeper I think.

I don't know. If Obama keeps getting shredded he may not win against McCain. At least they've already raked Hillary over the coals. I don't think there isn't a bone in her closet they haven't picked clean and dunked in an acid bath and then bleached. Obama's closet is smelling a little gamey as the days roll on..

I think the deciding moment for me was how the press keeps downplaying Hillary's acheivements..and I know the press is owned by republicans. So that kind of snapped my head around and made me wonder why they seemed to really want Obama's so-so vitories onscreen 24/7 and seem to want more than anything to "make Hillary go away" as the democratic candidate.

The it hit me...duh! They're AFRAID that she'll get the candidacy. It was right there and then that I changed my mind in favor of Hillary Clinton. Anyone who can scare the republican press so much that they'd completely stonewall even a victory like the one Clinton got in West Virginia and Kentucky...barely a mention...well...call me sneaky or whatever but I'm behind the one who they are so obviously cowering around.

In trying to sway me to keep my allegance with Obama, they actually acheived the opposite. I don't trust 'em.

The problem is, I wonder how many more out there are like me who were for Obama when the primaries came to their state but are now regretting that vote...that important vote that apparently means so much in the upcoming days to determine whether or not the one the republicans seem to want so much to run against (Obama) or the one they are deathly afraid they'll have to run against (Hillary)?

Can we redo the vote this late in the game??? *Yikes*

Silhouette

Hey, did anyone else see this petition going around??? I'm seriously considering signing..

>We are concerned democrats for a sane and electable candidate in the Fall of 2008. We are organizing a revolt to send a message to the democratic delegates. We are not in support of Barack Obama and never will be. A push for his nomination is party suicide. He will not beat McCain in the Fall due to being too young, too inexperienced and too vulnerable to the republican media machine; the same machine that hoisted him above Hillary Clinton to provide themselves with an easy target come Fall.

Therefore, we are gathering in our numbers, we supporters of a sane and electable candidacy this Fall and sitting-out the vote. Some will vote for McCain, others will simply not vote.

We are sending a strong message to the Democratic Committee that NO WE WILL NOT SIT DOWN AGAIN AND ALLOW YOU TO MAKE ANOTHER NOMINATION BLUNDER.

Nominate a candidate who can win or count us out. We're done.

>Signed>>

Silhouette

Bush congratulated Obama's "win" of the dem nomination.

A bit premature since the convention isn't until August and Hillary has not conceded.

She has the popular vote and Bush congratulated Obama on his "win". So did Big Media.

Sound familiar? You bet it does. Can you say Florida 2004? Growing numbers will not suffer this humiliating theft of democracy twice.
Nagging question: Why do THEY seem so eager for Obama to have the nomimation in spite of his losing the popular vote? That question I will repeat like a mantra until its full meaning sinks in.

I imagine we will see more and more of who THEY are as the next few weeks unfold...

Silhouette

You know, I should offer Obama a congratulations too: Congratulations for being so short-sided that you would opt to run (and lose) this Fall, further demoralizing struggling minorities thinking "even if we do make a presidential nomination, they'll still stonewall us", instead of doing the mature and patient thing. What would that be?

Certain success. But you don't want that, you want temporary glory that will end decisively in the Fall. Mark my words.

Here's the recipe that will assure your goals be acheived. It will involve patience. You run as Hillary's VP. Under those conditions you get on-the-job training and you inherit all of her support and more in 8 years. You get to be the first black VP in american history. And then you would go on to become the first black President in US history. Way better marks on your resume' than "first black loser". Again, mark my words. Just insert your name on CNN, MSNBC and FOX where Hillary's was these last five months. You get the picture eh?

But yeah your guaranteed success would take 8 whole years. Youngsters are so impatient. Instead though, you'll go on to run (and lose) this Fall as the same republican Big Media that propped you up will shoot you down with the same "fair press time" they gave Hillary's stunning acheivements. So yeah, good luck with that.

Here's to the first black loser for the Presidency. His political epitaph will read, "If only he could've waited 8 years".

And soon we will all be bowing to his royal Highness King McCain.

Congratulations Barack! (Good work delegates)

You'll all go down in history. Literally.

Silhouette

A little message arrived in my "Hillary" inbox today. She's announcing that she's getting behind Obama.

That's too bad. Perhaps she doesn't realize that she works for us and not the other way around. 25% of Hillary voters are not going that route and those numbers will be climbing as McCain and Big Media proceed to disembowel him.

This is no longer about Clinton vs Obama. It is about american democrat voters vs our elected officials. If they are pressuring her to drop out, they are pressuring us to drop out as well. She herself isn't our message. She herself CARRIED our message. That's an important distinction to make.

When the delegates snubbed her, they snubbed us.

Let me be perfectly clear: We will not support a wet-behind-the-ears 40-year old newbie to sit at the Commander In Chief's station.

This election isn't about blacks, it isn't about women. It's about an illegal war, a crises in foreign policy and a gutted economy. We are facing highly techinical and critical problems in our nation and electing the pupster Barack Obama is not an option under any circumstances. And voters are going to show their elected officials that message come this Fall and many Falls to come...

Barack Obama must earn his way into this critical seat. If he were to accept Hillary's VP position WE WOULD WIN THE NOVEMBER ELECTION BY A LANDSLIDE... This little detail escapes delegate attention again and again. Their poor little brains just cannot figure out why american people don't want a youngster in the Commander's chair playing with the controls this time around.

They are willing to risk National Security for political correctness, for backroom pressures and shortsided "black" hopefulness. If blacks think Obama's rise to power is so important, they too would back his VP position, since his position as frontrunner will only net them another bitter disappointment in the Fall. Demoralizing, to say the least.

Nope delegates. You can woo, you can coo. The ones of you in Big Media pockets can use your outlets to try to "talk sense" into the growing numbers of sensible people who know what putting a newbie in the Whitehouse in time of National Crises is all about. Good luck with that!

The Obama nomination is de facto a pre-November concession speech on behalf ot the democratic party to the republican one.

Good work guys and gals! You've done it again. John Stewart was right months ago when he posited: "Let's see how the democrats will *&$# up this election". Now we know: Overweening Martin Luther King dreams. And this when all they had to do was snug him into the VP position and put the sure-winner and seasoned commander at the helm. 8 years hence: America's first black president with all our support and blessings.. What a pity.

One wonders if the delegates graduated from Kindergarten.

Silhouette

OK, so after our group emailed, well I think it's millions by now, of dems and getting an overwhelmingly supportive responses, we of course get some Pro-Obama-come-hell-or-high water dissenters. Here's a great example of one:

A young girl in her 20's sent me a blackberry message lambasting me for being a party defector. Then she went on to scold me that she had carpooled today and "what did I do for the world?".

*chuckle*

I went on to explain that just this morning, as I do every morning, I went out past my recycling bin filled with every imaginable item a person could recycle, to feed my livestock, milk my goat and feed my chickens and tend my gardens. The milk from the goat, who converts weeds and a little grain, feeds me, my children, the dogs and the chickens. The chickens in turn feed us with their meat and eggs. We return the smashed shells to the chickens even along with our mostly-home-grown table scraps. Once a week we drive the truck to town to hit all the errands to save gas...and so on. I told her we salvaged some old fence posts to grow hogs with since hogs next to chickens convert the most protein from feeds. Then I went on to say that I'm sure I didn't need to tell her all that since being a metropolitan youngster she no doubt knew all this already about where her food came from..

Then it hit me what perfect metaphor it was for the rift that is forming right down the center of the democratic party. A full half of us are young, metropolitian, groomed to the nines, filled with ideals and jetting about in our carpools. The other half of us have calloused hands, are just making the bills and do things like mine coal, build the cars they jet around in and put the very food on the table they need to get them through their busy days.

I thought, you know, that little metro girl who was lecturing me on sustainability wouldn't even have the strength to text me on her little blackberry if people like me didn't pony-up, dirty our fingernails and provide her with a meal on her table, a meal provided by our knowing thrift and common sense down to the very marrow of our bones. How ungrateful I thought. She would starve without us...

She will starve without us...

Silhouette

Of course, there were problems when the Clinton's had the Whitehouse for 8 years...what to do with all the money from the surplus and one of the strongest economies in US history? lol

*******
"President Bill Clinton will leave office with the longest boom in US history still intact.

But the rapidly slowing economy will leave questions for his successor about how to manage the downturn.

Mr Clinton also leaves the legacy of a huge and growing budget surplus, the product of years of bitter battles between Republicans and Democrats.

But the very size of the surplus has provoked an even bigger debate, with a fierce controversy over how much of it should be used to cut taxes, how much for spending increases or reductions in the national debt. "

Source: BBC News Online's Steve Schifferes http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/1110165.stm
********

Now there's an impressive paragraph on the old resume'. The name "Clinton" is synonymous with "Economic Strength" and most importantly "Experience".

Silhouette

OK.

Favorite Big Media/Cheney Bush trick # 2324-5

Offer the service of a bunch of very concerned-looking Men in Black surrounding Obama while he wraps up his speech last Tuesday night. shaking hands. Everyone will be watching dontcha' know...lol...

Give the impression that Obama is in some sort of danger from a whacko racist. Net effect: undermine voter confidence in the dem nominee BEFORE HE EVEN LEAVES THE STAGE of his ostensibly and tentatively nosing his way to nominee. Send the message that "see, even if you get him on the ticket and even if he wins we're going to paint him out as a liability."

You gotta hand it to them. They know what they're doing and they watch us dems dance around like fish on a hot frying pan. Keep us busy and looking the other way while they slip us a Mickey like that one. Am I the only person who notices this stuff?

Meahwhile the comment that the only Hillary people who object to Obama are
women is having the opposite effect the Talking Heads were hoping for on CNN, MSNBC and FOX on the men they were hoping to humiliate into going their way (republican pro-Obama). I've heard from droves of men "pissed off" that the media is so obviously trying to manipulate them. These are hard-working men's-men who would, and I quote, "hand those &%*$#s their @$$ on a platter" if they were talking man to man.

So, once again it's amusing to keep a journal of the Big Media blunders. It's a media circus alright! The just didn't bank on being the ones in the ring being laughed at.

Silhouette

OK, so I'm the only one blogging here. No other dems around?

It just amazes me the timing of my musings here and Big Media's synchronicity. I was just thinking how the republican strategy plays off the emotions of vulnerable emotion-based voters (the majority) and uses timing combined with scare tactics to acheive its agendas. Then I flip on the TV and see CNN's "Your Brain On Politics" segment and I nearly fell off my chair laughing at their hubris. It's like they're telling us ahead of time what's coming up and daring us to see it. The guffaws offscreen must be deafening.

Here's their strategy in a nutshell...which has been recently modified due to unexpected Clinton surprises. Originally their idea was to stonewall their feared opponent (Clinton) and promote her easily-trounced rival. With Hillary neatly out of the way they planned at that very moment to begin the disembowelment of Obama via the same media that hand-walked him through the primaries.

One problem: Hillary isn't neatly out of the way... What to do? They are also flexible and quick on their feet. I guess I left that out.

Their modified plan is now to paint McCain out as somewhat of a buffoon...within reason of course...to "convince" democrats to support Obama, like he has a chance, and drop any notion whatsoever of Hillary making a comeback. Like I said, they want her NEATLY out of the way. Then when they think they've got her out of the way, they'll still play "fair" to Obama...but just not as fair as to McCain on the Big republican media circus.

Here's where the "Your Brain On Politics" comes in. With supreme timing and using the maximum power of scare tactics....suddenly at the last moment...I predict around October 15th give or take...there will suddenly be a huge media blitz about increasing tensions in the Middle east and certain war with Iran then as well. In this crises, this media-trumped critical moment, the republicans will rope in last minute, I predict, millions of extra voters to tilt the balance and win McCain the election. I can see his flabby white arms shaking a saddened and shocked Obama's in a conciliatory gesture the day after the election.

Suddenly, the Iran "crises" will die down due to some "expert republican manuevering" and the Obama campaign will be a fading memory.

You heard it here first. "Your Brain On Politics". The gall to flaunt their ploy as they put it into place. They bank on us having our blinders on. I'm here to take them off.

How would Hillary thwart their plan? Simple. They know her supporters are adamant and savvy to their BS from back in the day. Operation October 2008-gate won't work so easily. And under Hillary's husband, the economy was the strongest its been in US history. Those are numbers they just can't beat down with their Big Media sticks...as hard as they try.

They fear her diplomacy. They fear her stalwart and stubborn tenacity. They fear her intellect and hands-on approach to tackling tough problems. And most of all they fear her proven track record...something Obama doesn't have..

Obama doesn't have these qualities. "Hope" and "Change" will be hung on the rack when frightened voters realize a decorated war veteran will get them through the "Iran scare" in October.

Let's show the youngsters how the big kids play the game of politics. It's nice they have hopes and dreams and want starry-eyed change. But we know how the slicks work. We've seen an election or ten. In these troubled times the older and wiser voters must be heard above the young and hopeful.

If we don't, we will be sorry.

Silhouette

Meditation Assignment for Obama supporters: Why does the GOP rabidly want Obama to be the democratic frontrunner?

When you know the answer to this question Grasshopper, you will be worthy of the democratic party.

Silhouette

Someone emailed us today and asked me "Who are you and why are you writing us". With reference to the "Obama and the Republican Strategy" post above.

A fair question. Let me answer that.

*******
I am a registered democrat having voted democratic for over 25 years (Except
this Fall if Obama makes the nominee in August) I am a moderate, and very
deeply concerned about what some corrupt (in GOP pockets) elected democrats and
short-sided starry-eyed far-left democrats are doing to MY party.

Most importantly I'm deeply concerned about what can only be called EPIDEMIC
STUPIDITY (sorry, there's just no way to sugarcoat that pill) within my party as
to strategy and lack of wisdom concerning ultimate election results. It's as if
the democratic party is a lamb and the GOP a lion and the lamb keeps walking
right into the lion's den EVERY SINGLE TIME. I've had inbred chickens that have
more common sense than many of our elected dems. There are only two reasons
they would continue to operate this way: #1 They're in the GOP agenda or #2.
They're actually and authentically submorons.

See? Logic. It's not so hard.

An inescapable fact is that Big Media is not only republican-owned, but also an
extremely biased and republican run propaganda machine. Are you with me so far?
Because in order for you to understand the following, you need to REALLY
understand what that means.

OK. Premise: Big Media=GOP agenda. Check.

Now, Big Media PROMOTED Barack HUSSEIN Osama, er, excuse me, "Obama" over
Hillary Clinton REPEATEDLY, BLATANTLY and CONSISTENTLY throughout the primaries.
The REASON Hillary started getting a landslide towards the end is that even
common field mice could see how skewed Big Media coverage was against Clinton,
the landslides towards the end reflected our RESISTANCE to being led one more
time into the lion's den. A RESISTANCE that isn't going away BTW...lol..

Second Premise: GOP agenda = Promoting Barack Obama. Check.

With me so far? Good.

Now, the QUESTION is "Why was the GOP agenda to promote a candidate they would
run against?"

Any bells yet? Any lights turning on....? Nothing?

OK. Let me ask the other QUESTION. "Why did the GOP want ANYONE BUT HILLARY TO
RUN AGAINST?"

Why would anyone want to eliminate a contender before the race begins?

Answer: FEAR OF LOSING

The GOP, if they know nothing else, know winning strategy. They know under Bill
Clinton the economy was the strongest it was in US History. They know under the
Clinton reign that real fights ....REAL fights were cast by Hillary to get
universal health care. They know the Clintons are good at solving problems and
staying the course even when the going gets rough. They are EXPERIENCED in DC
politics and foreign affairs. These are all CRITICAL issues for this election.
Hinge issues. Do-or-die issues.

And guess who they knew, between Hillary and Obama, would fail in debates on
these issues?

GOOD! By jove you've done it. You've figured out that promoting Obama as our
candidate is PARTY SUICIDE.

That's who I am. That's why we're writing every single democratic elected
official and party officer between now and August. If we make the irreversible
mistake of nominating Obama, millions of people will defect from the democratic
party and guess who will be looking for jobs next time elections roll around?

Ah, I see! You're getting better at this logic thing all the time.

Good! We aren't chimps to be manipulated by Big Media (GOP slime tactics). We
aren't blind sheep being led to the slaughterhouse by corrupt or stupid elected
democratic officials. We HAVE A VOICE and we intend to USE IT. We are the TRUE
AMERICANS, the real source of power in this nation and we AREN'T GOING TO TAKE
THE BS ANYMORE.

Any more questions, don't hesistate to ask. I'll be happy to hand-walk you
through.

********

Silhouette

I get this message from Howard Dean on "unity" in the inbox today.

I respond thusly to his campaign for Obama:

*******
Dear Howard Dean. This election is indeed historic. It will (with Obama as its frontrunner) be the first election that both a woman and a black man ran and lost.

Of course with Hillary as it's front runner with Obama as VP it would be the first election a woman AND a black man ran and made it to the Whitehouse.

It's all about what kind of history we want to make.

I prefer the latter.

********
Reminder: Under the CLINTON Whitehouse we had one of the strongest economies in US history..

You know, while we're talking about making history.... :)

Silhouette

Well this is interesting....I hadn't counted on this...not for lack of effort though...

Seems people, including several superdelegates, are changing their minds about Obama.

By jove I think the fog of "hope" and "change" is clearing to reveal the cold hard facts of the reality of a non-unified democratic party!

Seems they're starting to realize Obama supporters are open to Hillary because she does have experience and the economy was the strongest under her last stint in the Whitehouse (alongside Bill). Polls reflect that Obama-ites do not have the fear for Hillary's running the country that Clintonites have for Obama. They're doing the math and figuring that with Obama they almost certainly won't win in the Fall and with Clinton they almost certainly will....

Now who said that first! lol....OK, enough gloating..

Here's what one recently on-the-fence superdelegate had to say:

**********

"...While initially remaining faithful to Barack Obama, my colleagues and I have been having many discussions about his ability to carry enough Clinton supporters to take the election this Fall. Even more unsettling is an increase in numbers of our constituents who initially supported Obama, but who are now writing to urge us to change our positions. While we still feel that Barack Obama does have a chance this Fall, we are beginning to get an unsettling feeling of defection not only from the Clinton supporters, but within the ranks of the very Obama supporters themselves. We will have to work very hard now not only to rope back in Clinton supporters, but also to keep Obama supporters from jumping off..."

********

A miracle! Obama supporters changing their minds due to thinking things through?? And they said it couldn't happen...

OK, no offense to Obama supporters for I was one myself way back when our state had the primary election. As time went on though it became clear to me that he was getting funding from way too many loaded "college students"...while Hillary's supporters could only muster 1/4 of that from a working/wealthier base and one of great passion...hmmm...one red flag...could it be that the same republican driven machine who sought to prop their dummy candidate from Big Media might also be funneling funds to his campaign via proxies? No! perish the thought!

..then the shameless promotion of Obama by Big Media...red flag number two...

.. his longtime minister denouncing the US...cripes...I'm critical of the US at times but when you add together that venom he had, plus that Obama used this guy's words as spiritual inspiration you begin to see a hatred of the US going to his very soul, masked of course with denial, distancing himself from the 20-year relationship at the 11th hour with a look of genuine concern..

.. Add in a sprinkle of "Obama" sounding like "Osama" and his middle name "Hussein" being the same sirname as a terrorist the US put to death...rumors that he has muslim ties...

...Not to mention we're at war and he's had no military service, nor any foreign relations experience...

You think??? You think he might not be electable eh?

Oh God...sometimes realizations come slowly and painfully. At least they come...

Better not-too-late than never.

Silhouette

Obama will not be a first after all..

*******
Warren G. Harding (Death by Blackness) depicts Harding's life as my family knew it. While growing up, we were never allowed to talk about the relationship to a US President outside of family gatherings because we were "Colored" and Warren was "passing." In 1884 he was a teacher at the local "Colored school" in Marion, Ohio, until he crossed the color line and became the 29th President of the US. Biographies written about Harding are quick to note his parents were descendants of Ohio pioneer families with English and dutch ancestry when, in reality, both of his parents were negroes whose ancestors escaped through the Underground Railroad. this book will set the record straight. Few have come forth to tell the truth. The Internet Encyclopedias reference Warren G. Harding's Blackness openly, to surprise, in view of the fact his Negro ancestry has been squelched by the government and his immediate family members. Moreover, he may have lost his life because of it.

Source: http://www.amazon.com/Warren-Harding-President-...
******

The only history Obama would make is one of embracing, and even perhaps exploiting, being half black instead of trying to hide it. It was speculated and still is to this day that our good old government did away with Harding because his blackness was "leaked" to the public. He died of a suspicioius "heart attack" even though he played the party line to try to cover up his own blackness.

What Obama actually winds up being is just another man who nudged out a more qualified woman for a job position by way of backroom politics and orchestrated misogyny. He is a man who is clearly milking the Martin Luther King persona to advance his lack of experience beyond boundries within which it should remain contained until he earns, by his merits alone, otherwise. He is stealing from other greater men and using race shamefully to "work it". For lack of a better phrase.

How boring.

Maybe he'll be the first guy to use his blackness to advance his inexperience to a position of unbelievable import?

Nah, McCain's Big Media will have him dethroned by about August 16th, or thereabouts. Of course they just can't put a lasting dent in Hillary, with the exception of manipulating, with Obama, racial sentiments and bending the ears of careless superdelegates. By then Hillary, our best shot at the Whitehouse, will be a mere footnote.

There could be more superdelegates moving in the direction of seeing Obama as a racist himself...using race to get ahead instead of experience. The first black president Warren G. Harding himself was widely believed to (as was the political trend of his day) ride along on Ku Klux Klan excursions to burn crosses in his fellow black's yards.

Whatever works I guess.

Obama has been riding trend waves long enough. It's time for him to pull out his resume' and put it on the table next to Hillary's.

blog comments powered by Disqus