Is Obama now over the worst?
March 22nd, 2008
The latest Gallup daily tracker showing the trend in the race for the Democratic nomination, just out, has that the front-runner and odds-on favourite, Barack Obama, is back in the lead following a difficult week when the news had been dominated by Pastor Wright.
This is important because the key battle in the coming days and weeks is going to be convincing the super-delegates that his relationship with his pastor does not make him an electoral liability.
A big development of the week, though, has been the way his team has been able to oppose, without any public downsides, the plan to re-do the primaries in Michigan on Florida. The result is that without these states it is going to be even harder for Hillary Clinton to achieve a lead in the popular vote - which is being seen as being absolutely vital if the super-delegates are going to over-turn the wishes of the pledged delegates.
Meanwhile the influential Politico site has an article that sets the big picture in context. Under the headline “Clinton’s campaign rests increasingly on a game of make-believe” it notes that “One big fact has largely been lost in the recent coverage of the Democratic presidential race: Hillary Rodham Clinton has virtually no chance of winning..Her own campaign acknowledges there is no way that she will finish ahead in pledged delegates. That means the only way she wins is if Democratic superdelegates are ready to risk a backlash of historic proportions from the party’s most reliable constituency.”
Nomination betting is here.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
On the front of the Guardian today it states,
“Obama struggles to limit damage in row as white voters slip away”
Is this the worry for November?
No it’s just bad reporting from the UK press. This election has really shown the value of the blogs - the US web coverage is excellent and so current. By the time the broadsheets cover a story they offer little new thinking and by the time they report something there’s been a new story develop entirely.
It may have been a fairer analysis to also show the latest Rasmussen tracker figures which show the opposite Clinton back in front . I am still pursuing my lay and back strategy . Having laid Obama at 1.35 the other week I backed him at 1.4 yesterday for £ 8 profit . I am now laying him again at 1.33 .
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/3/22/123727/461#commenttop
There was an interesting discussion on the MyDD blog on Hillary’s chances. I now think it is too late for her to make a comeback.
O/T: FT: HBOS, the UK mortgage lender, is seeking permission to raise funds in yen which could bolster its capital cushion by up to Y100bn (£500m).
The bank, with a market value of £18bn, is seeking authorisation from investors to issue yen-denominated preference shares. These could be used to bolster the bank’s so-called “tier one capital ratio”, a key measure of financial strength.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ff7f8c6c-f7b1-11dc-ac40-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1
Perhaps the ‘rumours’ that sent the share price crashing weren’t so malicious after all.
re 3. Gallup is much more influential and, indeed, I think that the ABC network does not consider Rasmussen to be “airworthy”.
The national polls have surprised me by showing that Obama’s support against Clinton has so far stood up surprisingly well. What seems to be happening nationally is that McCain seems to have made a little headway against both Obama and Clinton.
The bad news for Obama has come in polls in particular states. Whether this is purely temporary or not time will tell, and of course there is the usual caveat about single polls giving a misleading picture:
What I have seen so far is Clinton support against Obama holding at about +16% in Pennsylvania with one poll putting it as high as +26%
A single poll in W. Virginia showing Clinton +28% over Obama.
Match ups in Kentucky (also with a Dem Primary to come) showing McCain +10% against Clinton and +36% against Obama.
North Carolina’s latest poll now shows Obama at +1%.
The only certainty about polls is as always they will change. But the Rev Wright story might be hitting Obama hard in some places but not at all in others.
But the overall story is I think that we have moved on from when the electorate was divided into those who supported Obama and those who did not but would not mind if he won. Now we have a significant number of voters who seem to be actively anti-Obama.
6 That may be true Mike but it did not stop the Obamarists ignoring Gallup when they had him behind and citing Rasmussen when they had him in front . An impartial view is that they are in facy neck and neck in these head to head polls .
It will be interesting to see if he can get above 50% - if so, then he has come out of the Pastor Wright troubles stronger than before they arose.
But the “double helix” of their respective polling shows there is very little between the two. If Hillary now starts to come under pressure for her tax records and for claiming she has single-handedly brought peace to all corners of the world, then that might be the point at which they finally start to finally diverge.
I predicted this in yesterday’s thread - what’s happened is that a pro-Clinton spike in Gallup and a pro-Obama spike in Rasmussen have dropped out of the rolling averages. The most likely is that they’re more or less tied. If it stays that way, Obama will win the nomination.
I think Lurker Terry is right that some people are now anti-Obama in a way they weren’t a month ago, and it’s not just the pastor thing. Something Clinton people (like me) struggle with is the sheer misogynistic gloating by some of his supporters about the prospect of her losing. He hasn’t been doing it himself, of course, but we could do with a generous moment like the one Hillary gave him in the debate a couple of months back.
The reaction of some in Hillary’s camp to Richardson endorsing Obama has been less than flattering :
“An act of betrayal,” said James Carville, an adviser to Mrs. Clinton and a friend of Mr. Clinton.
“Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic,” Mr. Carville said, refering to Holy Week.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/us/politics/22richardson.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
10. Good grief, Palmer having an indirect pop at Obama now, based on the comments of a few Tory posters on this site. Partisanship descending to a new low level here…
Sorry to go O/T Mike, but this article on the Embryology Bill by Nadine Dorries at the Coffee House blog makes interesting reading.
The Embryology Bill, cui bono?
Nick,
“the sheer misogynistic gloating by some of his supporters about the prospect of her losing”
I will challenge you to demonstrate ANY such misogynism here. It would be as absurd for me to say the supporters of Hillary were playing the racist card in wishing to see Obama lose.
From my perspective, Hillary has singulalrly demonstrated any contrition for her decision to sanction the Iraq war - which IS a valid reason to hope she loses. But equally, she has said nothing else by way of a distinctive programme to rehabilitate America, nationally and internationally. Obama on the other hand has a distinctive voice from that which has gone before. For that reason alone I will be happy to see him receve the Democratic Party nomination.
But “misogyny”? Give over….
Reads better as “Hillary has singularly failed to demonstrate any contrition”
14. While I’m certain there is an element of misogyny among some of Clinton’s detractors, I think her supporters see a lot of non-misogynistic criticism as misogyny, just because its harsh. For example, if she is described as “a stupid bitch” it would go down as misogyny, when she may have been equally described as “a stupid bastard” if she was a man.
Nick 10. I’m sure that you do not mean it but your use of “misogyny” to describe critics of Hillary sounds a bit like Ken’s liberal use of the word “racist” whenever he talks about those who question him.
I think you have got it wrong here.
Mike any polls due out this weekend??
17 I am not one to jump to the defence of Nick Palmer ….
But, I have been taken aback by the sheer ferocity of some of the criticism of Hillary on this site — much of which can fairly be described as “misogynistic gloating”.
For the record, I would never vote for Hillary (or Nick) as they supported the Iraq War.
re 18. I don’t think so. Holiday periods are generally avoided by pollsters because samples get distorted.
This month we have yet to see the ComRes poll in the Indy, the Telegraph’s YouGov survey and MORI.
‘The mysoginist gloating’ on here has been so obvious that even a blind man on a galloping horse would have noticed. But mysogyny is still acceptable where racism isn’t which is why it’s so little commented on. Anyway an excellent leader in todays Guardian praising Obama’s speech. ‘Language Lesson’
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/mar/22/barackobama.uselections2008
Mike. Don’t you think the use of words like ‘fat’ ‘ugly’ ‘ and most common ‘wicked witch’ have any mysoginistic connotations at all?
re 1. Good to see the Guardian on top of the news again and right up to date. The speech was made on Tuesday - today is Saturday.
No, Roger (21), I think you are wrong. One dislikes lots of people - inevitably some of them - but that does not mean that one necessarily dislikes a whole group of people.
I dislike Cameron, for example, but I do not necessarily dislike all Old-Etonians. I dislike the present Pope, but not necessarily all Catholics. I dislike Bush, but not necesssarily all Americans. I dislike Blair, but not necessarily the entire Labour Party membership.
So I dislike Hillary, but not ncessarily all women, and not necessarily all people with the surname Clinton. Just some of them.
The problem is, I think, for Laboristas the other way round.
You like Americans, so you just have to love Bush. You like Catholics, so you just have to love the Pope. You like women, so you positively LOVE Hillary.
Isn’t it like that?
if Obama still manages to squeak past Hilary, then I fear he has really cooked the Democrats goose vs McCain - the combo of Pastor Wright, and, unfortunately, his eloquent speech, will have fixed in US voters’ minds that he really is a race candidate, which I fear will drive independents, moderate Republicans, and even pariotic blue collar Democrats, into McCain’s arms come November - his speech was beautiful, fascinating, emotional and brilliant in many respects, but I think too clever - by seeking to square too many circles, the only dominant message to come out was that he feels strongly enough about race issues not to disown the man who, at the moment, will lose him the election - sadly, for those of us interested in the new approach he would bring as a President, I fear this is not a state-wide vote winning strategy, albeit a courageous stance - Wright’s rants are just too toxic for Obama to do anything other than condemn wholeheartedly and distance himself from - I would have thought a short speech concentrating on that, rather than the brilliant speech he delivered, were what was needed politically - I hope I am wrong
26
I thought his ‘race’ speech was a largely successful attempt to change the subject away from Rev Wright. At first glance, it looks like it’s been effective. Only the results of the remaining primaries will show the true picture.
4 - Jerome Armstrong on Mydd is so blind to anything that is positive for Obama it’s painful to watch him going down yet another blind alley.
Of the states he mentioned he calls three toss ups which are likely for Obama - North Carolina, Indiana and Oregon. With that the rest of his article falls down totally. NC’s latest poll was at the height of the Wright furore, if she couldn’t lead then then she won’t win the state.
West Virginia and Pennsylvania are the archetypal Clinton states that are left. If there was one bet to go for in what is left of the primaries it’s that she will win by at least 20% in WV.
8 - Incorrect, the recent polls apart from the two trackers are all showing Obama leads.
26 - If the US public fail to elect a candidate because they ‘talk too clever’ that would be a crime. Personally, however, I don’t think it’s at all true that American voters cannot cope with being treated like adults. After Bush I think they crave it more than anything, to do the same is also McCain’s biggest challenge.
1. the guardian for whatever reason are extremely pro clinton.
10. “misogynistic gloating by some of his supporters about the prospect of her losing. He hasn’t been doing it himself, of course”
where is this, i’ve been following quite closely a range of american blogs and i haven’t seen anything of this, i realise that you and quite a bit of the left in this country have backed the wrong horse in this contest and if he wins the overall prize it makes thing awkward for you politically, but no need to be so grudging in admitting its over.
23,
The article acknowledges that.
However I think they are looking at the long term view for November.
As the effects of the clips of the pastor row have alienated some white voters.
Therefore the effect on Pennsylvania, could be a barometer for the general election in the fall.
13. Nadine Dorries is the worse of the US religious right transported to the UK. What evidence is there that biotechnology lobby groups have been donating to British politicians to get this passed? She’s a crackpot that can’t appreciate that others don’t share her religious fundamentalist view of things.
30. Pennsylvania is a very, very narrow demographic that is in no way representative of the US at large. How many poor, all white, industrial urban states are there?
29. Spot on methinks. It’s the worst kind of sour grapes.
28 Paul the other polls you refer to are mostly no longer recent and prior to wrightgate , unlike yourself I can look objectively at all the polling evidence as I will be happy whether it is Clinton or Obama who wins the contest . I do admit that my betting prefers a close contest to carry on as long as possible .
31.I don’t always agree with her on these issues, but equally I would not dismiss her views in those terms either!
34. ‘I can look objectively’
hahahhaha
36 Judging by your posts it is clear that you can’t .
There’s a classic Tony Blair quote that’s been doing the rounds ever since Labour started promoting ID cards:
At the Labour party conference in 1995, Tony Blair demanded that ‘instead of wasting hundreds of millions of pounds on compulsory ID cards as the Tory Right demand, let that money provide thousands more police officers on the beat in our local communities.’[12] (Wikipedia)
This quote is wonderfully double-edged as it shows the strange dance both the Labour Party and Conservatives have done on the issue since 1995. The Tories were pursuing an ID scheme in 1995 which got dropped by the Labour party when they came into power in 1997.
By 2005, the Labour Party had changed sides, and brought in a new bill for ID cards worse than anything the Tories had intended, which the Conservatives supported.
By 2006, the Tories had changed sides, and David Cameron decided to oppose the new scheme, bringing both the Tories and the Labour party to a complete reversal of their positions in one handy decade.
lol just read that Kettle piece on the Mayoralty. What a load of rubbish! The LibDems would win a by-election, ergo they should romp home in the mayoralty! One would have thought that it would be a pretty trivial matter to see the difference.
And then undermines the whole premise of the original “by-election” argument, by saying that the problem is that the LibDems have picked the wrong candidate! Coz a fundamental feature of LibDem by-election successes is having a nationally well-known candidate. Or maybe not.
Scorates 32 “Pennsylvania is a very, very narrow demographic that is in no way representative of the US at large. How many poor, all white, industrial urban states are there?”
That is very unfair Socrates. Pennyslvania isn’t all white - Philly in particular has a large Afican American population. Looks like statewide African Americans are 11% of the population, compared to 6% in Wisconsin, 12% in Ohio and 15% in Illinois.
O/T I hope a few PBers managed to load onto Newcastle today, especially the bet I suggested last night and previously, having them leading at both Half Time and Full Time vs Fulham.
Earlier this afternoon someone bought all the Tory GE seat money on Spreadfair, right out to 339 seats, very brave when compared with their current tally.
Back on topic - a number of people remain excited regarding the outcome of the Democratic nomination, which is personally helpful as it maintains Obama’s price within backable limits, i.e. 0.4-1 on Betfair yesterday. The contest itself is over as Rod Crosby’s spreadsheet has been telling us for at least six weeks now. There is simply no way back for Hillary and even Bill appears to be acknowledging this fact.
34 - ‘objectively’ is exactly what I’ve been doing. Only now do people seem to be coming around to the opinion I’ve held for ages that Clinton doesn’t stand a chance of the nomination.
Some have been too easily led by the spin and haven’t done their own research, I’ve kept trying to tell people but some have been listening to the news channels too much. Channels that *benefit* from claiming that it is closer than he reality. It sounds as though you were one of them and possibly for the reasons that you admit to.
Also the polls referred to are from the *last week*, the time of the Wright affair. I wish people would check their facts before posting.
Here’s the figures *again*.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html
38, “ALDC”,
I think that the crucial point is that when the parties are away from the influence of the Home Office hierarchy (who have been eager for ID cards since about 1952 - Roy Jenkins and Peter Lilley have both talked about it), their sense reasserts itself.
When they are “captured” by the Home Office after a prolonged period in office - when there is more chance that a given Home Secretary will fall for the “Minister, it just so happens that we’ve got a perfect solution for the current [insert issue of the day] - ID cards!” line. Most Home Secretaries simply binned the proposals, but Michael Howard (for the Tories) and David Blunkett (for Labour) swallowed them hook, line, sinker, pole, angler and fishing chair.
Thus the huge infighting in 2005 between Howard and Davis on ID cards. When the Tories return, as long as Davis is Home Secretary, it should be okay. Only if it’s a prolonged period of Tory rule, with a weaker-minded Home Secretary falling for the line (and being able to run it past his PM), will the situation reassert itself. Hopefully the spell will of worn off the Opposition Party by then …
Anyway - back home from the States, now (jet-lag hasn’t yet had time to kick in; as far as I’m concerned it’s lunchtime …). I’ve come to the conclusion that Obama is safer than I thought. There would have to be a scandal/catastrophe for Obama to pile in now - and the Pastor Wright thing has shown that that particular bar is set very high. I would have thought that something like this would be the kind of thing that could end it for Obama - but he’s looking like he has weathered this storm and possibly even strengthened himself into the bargain.
It does, as Lurker Terry says above, seem to have provided an anti-Obama theme to some.
10 - Not ‘misogynistic’ Nick, folks just really do have a viseral dislike of Hillary Clinton, it’s nothing to do with her gender.
Were the likes of Blanche Lincoln, Liddy Dole, Mary Landrieu, Kay Bay-Hutchinson, Kathleen Sebelius or Patty Murry running i dont think there would be anything like the antipathy Hillary Clinton attracts, simply because she’s so profoundly divisive - a perception that hasnt been helped by the down right nasty and mean spirited campaign she’s run.
She’s not out of the race and as long as she hangs around she has a chance), however slim(although if she were anyone other than Hillary Clinton she wouldnt still be in the race IMHO)… but it is a chance that is steadily becoming more and more remote and it’s already pretty unlikley.
As to Obama overcomming the Wright controversy my sense is that he’s got over the worst of it, in fact events on Fox and elsewhere suggest there has been a certain backlash in Obama favour of late… the extend to which he has been permanently hurt by the episode is still unclear.
What could be damaging for Clinton, is if her church were to be explored, perhaps the main reason she hasnt gone hard on the Wright story… there would seem to be plenty of mile-age there should anyone seek to explore it.
Way O/T - NCAA Championship Tournament
West Virginia University (7th) beats Duke University (2nd) 73-67
Montani Semper Liberi!
40. It wasn’t just the “whiteness” of the state, but the other factors thrown in too. I wouldn’t say Wisconsin or Ohio would be a very good subset of America at large either. Incidentally, Illinois very much is - they have a slightly larger African American community, but also there is a Hispanic population too. There’s also a lot of poor inner city, more booming places in north Chicago, wealthy suburban areas and wide open agriculture country. Of course, Illinois isn’t a very good barometer for this campaign because Obama’s home state advantage distorts things.
44. Has Lurker Terry posted anything but anti-Obama themes even before pastorgate?
47. There’s also huge numbers of white Catholics there, which makes it unlike a lot of other states.
48 - Which partly explains the state’s strong tilt to the Dems in the last few (well… eight!) election cycles, largly because of Chicago and its very strong base for the Dems (helped of course by the Daley machine in the city)… if your after a national barometer I’d go for Missouri, its become unfashionable but i still think that MO is the state that reflects the US as a whole most completley.
I have just been scrolling through and thought I might mention the socalled Jewish vote.
As many Jews tend to live near Synagogues, Kosher shops etc their political base can be identied.
Geoffrey Alderman in his book “London Jewry and London Politics” has a whole section on attitudes to Livingstone by Jews. One chapter is called “County Hall under Labour: A friendhsip unfullfilled” and it is followed by a chapter “Descent into War” which refers to the 1981-86 GLC.
Livingstone has not changed since.
I would suggest that those interested look at the local election results for the following wards in the constituencies posted in the last thread at number 96.
Hendon: Edgware, Hendon, Hale, Mill Hill
Finchley and Golders Green: Garden Suburb, Golders Green, Finchley Church End and Child’s Hill
Ilford North; Clayhall, Barkingside, Fullwell (and Cranbrook in Ilford South)
Hackney North and Stoke Newington: Lordship, New River, Springfield and Cazenove
Hampstead and Highgate: Hampstead Town, Swiss Cottage
Harrow East: Stanmore Park, Canons.
In addition;
Brent North; Barn Hill and Kenton
Harrow West; Pinner
Enfield Southgate; Southgate Green
Westminster North; Maida Vale, Regent’s Park
The above wards include London’s Synagogues with the largest congregations: Edgware(United), Edgware (Reform), Finchley,Kinloss Gardens (United),Hendon (Reform), Hendon (United), North West London (Reform), Hampstead Garden Suburb (United), Golders Green (United), Mill Hill (United), Ilford, Beehive Lane (United), Coventry Road(Federation), Stanmore(United), Belmont (United). Kenton (United), St John’s Wood (united) and the New London (St John’s Wood)
The smaller and very Orthodox congregations in Stamford Hill and in east and North London are less easy to place.
I acted as agent in the Hackney, Sprigfield by election in December. Many Jewish voters were looking forward to voting on May 1st and it was certainly not for Livingstone.
the latest US poll just released
http://press-releases.techwhack.com/17845-obama
There are lots of politicans I don’t like. There are only afew who make my bllod boil/skin crawl. All of those in the later catergory are men except one, namely Hillary Clinton, who only managed to catapult herself into this premier league during the course of this campaign.
I suppose all those who love Hillary and scream ‘misogyny’ at those who critise her would apply the same in philosophy to those who venemously attack Margaret Thatcher.
The Republicans and their mouthpieces such as Fox News are suddenly going easy on Obama as they now want him to be the Democrat nominee.Fox won’t kill their fox. If the Democrats think that blue collar white voters are going to turn out for Obama in November by the time the Republicans have painted him as the most unpatriotic candidate the Democrats have ever fielded they have one huge shock awaiting them. This is looking like a huge win for McCain unless the Democrats can find a way of stopping this car crash .
47
” I wouldn’t say Wisconsin or Ohio would be a very good subset of America at large either. ”
A 2004 Slate article says of Ohio:
“Ohio’s vote tracks closely with the national vote not because its voters have any greater ability to affect voters elsewhere but because its demographics track national ones more closely than most.”
http://www.slate.com/id/2103984/
53,
A bit of a gamble by the Republicans, that.
Seeing that he’s got a reputation (earned) for oratory and inspiration, if that is so, they could come badly unstuck.
Sorry but that is pure flight of fancy . The plain fact is that McCain has virtually nil chance of winning in November , any Democratic candidate would win even Mickey Mouse - it’s the economy stupid rules and McCain’s best is to stop a rout and
56 oops … and escape with a respectable heavy defeat .
55
The onslaught will come once Obama is definitely selected.There will still be plenty of time to get the message over .
58. I don’t think Fox has much sway over white working class Dems.
53. McCain met David Cameron on his recent visit. I don’t like to raise the age question, but I think that when he and Obama square up head to head in the presidential race, its going to be a feature of the contest.
It was something which struck me immediately when looking at these photo’s. Add in the fact that Obama is a more inspirational speaker and I think that McCain will struggle.
I also think that a negative swiftboat style onslaught will not be as effective, if anything it could backfire big time. It might also make this a very divisive contest with strong opinions on all sides boosting turnout which could work in Obama’s favour rather than the Republicans.
After reading the article about Obama in the Guardian and reading his toss away comment about “whites” I think he has really damaged his cause - I was tempted away by certain comments by the Hillary campaign to the Obama campaign - and now I am turned away by his association with the Pastor and his attitude towards white people - racism is a two way street which a lot of people seem to forget …
At school in the U.S. I made a formal complaint about my stand-in Sociology lecturer who was black and attacked white students in the class - picking on them and asking how it felt to be racist and that all whites were racist - it was really offensive - and my official Sociology teacher when she came back went ape.
I find the attitude by a lot of people that racism towards white people does not exist really weird - when Obama was attacked by Bill Clinton the papers went wild but when Obama personally does the same it does not mention in column inches …
But the polls will show a different tale in November as a lot of white voters who are liberal and support him will be offended by his off the cuff comments and abstain from voting altogether … at this rate my partner and I will vote for Nader.
60
It doesn’t need to be a swiftboat assault.They will just produce footage of Obama’s wife saying this is the first time she felt proud to be american;cut to Obama not putting his hand on his heart during the national anthem; cut to Pastor Wright and a comment that Obama was in his congregation for 20 years. This message will be very potent with swing voters.
61 - His pastor was, of course, one of the first to respond to the AIDS crisis but I suppose things like that don’t matter.
Obama’s speech was also all about being against what you claim to be against. Strangely.
Nose. Spite, Cut, Face, rearrange as required.
O/T Nadal lost in straight sets. Trainer came out to attend to blisters. Didn’t seem himself. Sorry fellas.
56
But who’ll get blamed for the economy? (Democratic) Congress? (Republican) Bush? Clinton/Obama/McCain can surely all run without a taint when it comes to the economy?
62.If that is the kind of campaign planned, then McCain is toast!
63
“His pastor was, of course, one of the first to respond to the AIDS crisis but I suppose things like that don’t matter.”
One of his responses was apparently to accuse the USA government of: “inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color.”
http://www.slate.com/id/2186860/
65 Bush and the Republicans are being blamed look at the polls on these subjects . McCain is a republican therefore will take the fallout .
Hillary under 20 on Intrade - first time for a while
Mark Senior was unable to get last years local elections right in Worthing where he lives. Elections thousands of miles away are even more difficult to predict.
62. Methinks the response to that video would be rather simple. Play several of the more patriotic clips from his speeches. Secondly, Obama will be able to outraise and outspend McCain easily.
61. “I am turned away by his association with the Pastor and his attitude towards white people - racism is a two way street which a lot of people seem to forget …”
which is exactly the point he made in that speech the other day, would probably be a better use of your time to read/watch that than read the effing guardian
69 oh gawd my stalker rises from his coffin
60
“I don’t like to raise the age question, but I think that when he and Obama square up head to head in the presidential race, its going to be a feature of the contest.”
Does it have to be a negative one for Mr McCain? I think (male) TV anchors are often quite old in the USA, so perhaps they have a more deferential attitude than the UK?
73.I did point out that this could be problem for McCain in combination with Obama’s more motivational speech skills, rather than his age being a negative on its own.
69. I grew up in Worthing. Predicting whether Tories got 75% or 80% was always a tricky business so no disgrace in getting it wrong occasionally. Once I spent hours in what I reckon might be a contender for most pointless activity in history, stuffing Labour envelopes in leaflets in the unheated Labour Hall in Lyndhurst Hall, Worthing ahead of the 1983 General Election (Con maj 8 zillion or so)
age only seems to be a problem if you do silly things that a wobbly old person would do, like falling over or start making absent minded mistakes like mixing up names when speaking in public.
64. Nadal has been poor throughout the tournament.
He struggled to beat Tsonga in the last 16 (having to come back from 5-2 down in the 3rd set). Then in the quarters he had a tight match against Blake which also went to a final set.
Djokovic was a clear favourite today and won convincingly as expected. Indeed the Sky experts were saying that they expect Djokovic to replace Nadal as World number 2 in the next few months.
75 ChrisD
Surely in the Presidential election, if Mr Obama was the Democratic candidate, his ’speech skills’, would be less of a factor as there would be clear policy differences between the Democratic and Republican candidates, that are absent in the Democratic Candidate contest.
Not sure about a coffin, but Mark senior was still wrong about Worthing in 2007.
75 they are not that far in front these days .
79 Can’t get everything right but my end position in the pb.com 2007 comp was very near the top , where was yours .
78.Just had a post disappear into moderation ether twice without any dodgy words in it?
68 Mark Senior
Economy polls.
The most recent one I could find looks inconclusive.
Zogby 8 March - Best on economy: Clinton 26%, McCain 25%, Obama 21%
82 ChrisD
Did it include a link?
83.No, just edited the post and it disappeared again. Weird!
78.I listened to McCain’s speech at the Conservative conference and I was not impressed, he came across as a poor speaker.
Policy differences should matter. But I suspect that like British politics now, it is not the detail that wins the argument, or more importantly the votes. It will be the politician who inspires people to go out and vote that will win, especially if people feel the pain of a recession. Considering the low turnout last time, I think that is important.
10
The USA badly needs a woman president and a black president. This black politician might be the one, this woman most definitely is not.
I cannot forgive her for supporting her husband in killing 500,000 children in Iraq [UN figures] by keeping up sanctions. One of the great genocides of our times.
Incidentally, what was your stance on the Iraq sanctions policy?
Malcolm
To respond to the earlier posts - I’ve never made a secret of the fact that I like Hillary, but I don’t have any particular stake in the outcome, except in the sense that we all are affected by whom the Americans pick. I wasn’t only referring to this blog - Daily Kos has other examples - but Roger at 22 sums it up. It’s not a question of who we like or dislike, but the choice of epithets that only work against women (bitch, witch, cow, etc.). If someone criticised Obama in terms that are only used against black people, we’d shout him off the site.
Tressage’s comment is just strange. Of course left-wingers don’t support every women candidate! But much as I dislike much of what Mrs T did, I wouldn’t attack her in those terms.
My point was simply that Obama, if he wins, is going to need people who preferred Hillary, and if he reckons he’s sure to win then a bit of magnaminity would be a good idea. What *we* say on this site is of course neither here nor there as far as that goes.
86 ChrisD
“Considering the low turnout last time, I think that is important”
I thought the 2004 presidential election had an unusually high turnout?
82 That is pretty conclusive to me Rep 25% Dem 47% given just two choices the Clinton and Obama votes would be pretty near unanimously transferred IMO .
86, what rubbish, it no more needs a woman or a black president, then it needs a one legged chipmonk president.
It might be a good idea if you stopped judging people on their race and gender. We used to have words to describe people like yourself.
Actually, Djokovic was only a marginal favourite in the betting before the match went off - principally because of his abysmal performance last round against Wawrinka. By contrast, Nadal actually exceeded expectations by beating Tsonga and Blake, two flat power hitters with good records against him. Blake in particular had a 3-0 record (inc straight sets win in IW two years back), and is a really bad matchup of styles for Nadal on hard court, so that was especially impressive (Blake played superbly too).
Nadal was a good tip to my mind, but he had an off day. Djokovic really lifted his game, aside from a few too many forehand UEs.
44 Andy
I arrived back from the US midweek. My take from the deep south was that the entrenched racists were waiting for a gift like the media response to the pastor. Interestingly one of my Alabama Republican friends thought that his Indiana speech was fantastic!!! I left before speaking to anyone about ‘the speech’ but from blogs and most of the media he has healed some wounds.
Interestingly Senator Obama is a natural healer; he does not fight dirty like the evil Clintons and their clan of Ickes, Ferraro, Carvel and ‘poison’ Penn.
Many of his supporters would like him to get down in the gutter but when you are reaching out to the best of America you ought not to appeal to the worst. He’ll do OK and I really hope his team will be able to focus on November as soon as possible. H Rodham Clinton’ campaign is at best damaging the party, at worst destroying it.
Malcolm
90 Mark Senior
You’re assuming all of Mrs Clinton and Mr Obama numbers come from Democrats on that poll. There’s no info provided.
In a 27 Feb Rasmussen poll, on the economy 45% prefer McCain, 39% Obama, Mrs Clinton not mentioned.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/mccain_trusted_more_than_obama_on_national_security_iraq_and_the_economy
61 rej4sl
You are beginning to sound like my friends who were waiting for a reason to dislike Obama. Obviously your stand-in Sociology lecturer has had a huge impact on your life. Some kind of sub-conscious racism seems to be drifting to the surface.
Malcolm
95 Malcolm
Please don’t accuse people of racism just because they don’t share your preference for Mr Obama.
70. How about a clip of his DNC speech which launch him into the national spotlight:
“Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America — there’s the United States of America… We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes.”
78. If it comes down to policy I can’t see how the Democrats can lose.
85. McCain is a very poor speaker in my book. He’s only got his one gentle “my friends” speech.
87. But aren’t a lot insults either male-only or female-only? If someone was calling McCain a bastard we wouldn’t notice, even though its a male-only insult. However, call Clinton a witch…
Dearest Gaz
What utter tosh. People like me pay taxes and care for the world and I am very pro affirmative action. So I guess my friends and I have a word for you as well.
Malcolm
88.I thought that in recent years turnout has been pretty appalling in US elections? Even in 2004, I would say that the electorate were extremely underwhelmed by both choices.
99 ChrisD
Election Turnout in 2004 Was Highest Since 1968
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10492-2005Jan14.html
94 - I don’t see any of that but what I do see is Democratic party voters allowing themselves to be shaped once more by the Fox News agenda.
As I said earlier, I think that being talked to like adults, as Obama did in his thoughtful and discursive speech on race, is what Americans will respond positively to.
If many do not look behind the soundbites and opposition spin, however, maybe I’ll be proved sadly wrong.
97, we are all very clear about what you are, you are pro racial discrimination. That makes you a rather unpleasant racist.
61. rej4sl. Knowing that you are a regular contributor here I have found your views and that of your partner’s on the Democrat race very interesting.
I watched the full Obama “Pastorgate” speech on youtube and posted my initial response here. Stunningly good.
On further reflection I would also add it was courageous, intelligent and completely in tune with his message of change.
It would have been easy for him to jettison his Pastor. His more considered response and speech demonstrates his maturity, the complexities of the issue and his genuine desire to move the debate forwards, beyond the old entrenched arguments.
The situation you experienced and described as a student sounds unprofessional but I am surprised and disappointed that you allow it to shape your response to Pastorgate.
47 - What is it that you see as anti-Obama about my post number 7? Do you dispute some or all of what I have said? If so please comment further.
I am not an Obama supporter and I, perhaps wrongly, still think that Clinton has a real chance of the nomination. But I have not and will not make any posts declaring that any candidate is evil or use any personal insults against any of them. My aim is to put a point of view but not to upset or quarrel with anybody on a personal basis.
It is my practice to restrict comment to the politics and the politicians. I have seen on many forums that when posters start commenting on other posters things often become rather nasty.
Socrates at 96: maybe (though I’ve heard ‘bastard’ used of women, by other women). But my main point was that it’s difficult to build a coalition if your followers have been routinely insulting your opponent - kind of like proposing a joint ManUtd/ManCity fan club: it’d be difficult! Anyway, I’ve stirred up more heat than I intended, so I’ll leave it there - not really my business anyway.
99.Turnout in previous elections has been poor, and even the increased figure for 2004 is not great. Do you expect the turnout to increase further or slip back again?
The comments I was referring to were not to do with Pastorgate but with his throwaway comments - when he mentioned his grandmother who is white and she said she would cross the road if she saw blacks - and he said that was typical of whites - if that is what he said I am appalled –
His pastor actually has some good ideas - and sounds pretty radical and so does Obama have some good ideas - I am just against anyone who uses racism in any form - white against black, or black against white,
And no it is not subliminal racism - I am a 41 year old and the incident happened 2 years ago when I was studying at University - school is a name we call it here …
I have been fighting racism, sexism, homophobia, and any other form of discrimination for the last 25 years and am very proud of the fact that I am a progressive …
Calling someone racist just because they can use judgment against people is sad - I find it difficult to choose between Obama and against Hillary - I did read his entire Pastorgate speech and found it enlightening and brave - and it needed to be said to challenge the institutional racism in the U.S. - he needs to be the candidate for all Americans like he said in his speech - but the throw away comment about his grandma is very negating the very things he said in his speech.
Off Topic: Sunday Times lead story on website:
‘Iron fist’ Gordon Brown faces revolt.
Oh dear, shades of John Major????
106. Dont worry, that malcolm character is one of those sad souls who thinks that only white people are racist. In one paragraph he displays his ‘right on’ anti racist credentials, and then informs us how he thinks that race should be primary characteristic used to choose who should get employment and who shouldnt.
He is a fool, probably a very young one.
97 I am very pro affirmative action.
Stalin, PolPot & Hitler had their own ideas of “Affirmative Action”.
One man’s affirmative action is another’s tyranny.
Britain will be better off once Labour’s Positive Isms are held for what they are and British people can be treated regardless of colour, faith or where you stick your genitals.
87 Well said Nick - agree entirely
Hey Nick, have you seen the ‘Doomsday Memo’ published in the times? Charles Clarke, Stephen byers etc, they really arent helping your cause, they sense the PM is in a weak situation, and even vulnerable. Your colleagues must be rather annoyed, especially ones like yourself in the marginals. They do say everything in life is a cycle, and i really do get a Major style dejavu out of all this.
But, the big danger for us Tories, is that the global clouds of doom and gloom actually clear away and the economy actually pulls through the present situation relatively unscathed. Brown will be in a commanding position.
One of the most powerful soundbites i can remember coming from Hague when he was party leader, was his ‘Downturn made in Downing street’, the fact that we didnt have a downturn destroyed his credibility.
102.
Here’s the crux of the issue: old media v new media.
From the mainstream TV ‘Pastorgate’ was a disaster for Obama. Even our dear old BBC (not that it matters in the US) was pathetic - Old Mother Edwards and the Reverend Justin Webb making it look from snatched soundbites as though the race was over.
Go to YouTube and it’s a different world - “the greatest speech since Gettysburg” and “I wish I was American” were just two of the comments.
Question is, which carries the greatest clout?
106 - As I said, that was the spin from Fox News. In fact you should check out how their own people turned on each other as a result of Fox perverting the message of what Obama meant about ‘white people’.
If Democrats take their cue from the right wing media then their cause really is hopeless.
You say you are against what ghe said he was against in the speech.
It’s like you are saying ‘I agree with you, that’s why I don’t agree with you’.
112 & 113 Did you also look at the Rev Wright’s sermons on YouTube and the comments associated with them? The sermons and comments are disturbing.
Obama made a great speech but it wasn’t flawless and while Fox went overboard on the “typical white person” line they had a point in his not addressing the substance of the argument on Wright. Obama’s attraction is that he moves beyond the identity politics of the 20th century, beyond seeing everything in black or white, his Church though hasn’t. There are nuances in the fuller versions of what Wright said that aren’t apparent in the highlights but there is a lot of potential damage remaining.
Obama faced the race issues directly and bravely but in doing so he also adopted quite a radical agenda as he sought to align all the “oppressed” against the forces of capitalism, big business, banks etc. He has delivered hostages to fortune for the general election, how the GOP uses them will be interesting as McCain himself can’t and I believe wouldn’t want to be associated with dirty tricks.
While I don’t think Pastorgate has damaged Obama much versus Hillary the damage vis a vis McCain has still to be seen.
105 Chris
The way that the US computes turnout for national elections is peculiar in that for the denominator they often use the estimated resident adult population, rather than number of registered voters. Given the number of adults who are ineligible to vote (non US citizens, convicted felons in some states, etc etc) the turnout figures look worse than they really are. That’s not to say that they’re good, but the headline numbers are not comparable to the UK turnout figures.
For example in 2004, the reported turnout was 55% of the estimated voting age population, but this was in fact 70% of the registered voter population.
I have no idea I never watch Fox News - I got my comments from the “liberal” Guardian and the “liberal” Huffington Post and the latter had a radio transcript which gave the comments in full -
This is how he clarified the parts of his speech on the radio
610 WIP host Angelo Cataldi asked Obama about his Tuesday morning speech on race at the National Constitution Center in which he referenced his own white grandmother and her prejudice. Obama told Cataldi that “The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity, but that she is a typical white person. If she sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know (pause) there’s a reaction in her that doesn’t go away and it comes out in the wrong way.”
i.e. my grandmother is a typical white person … which indicates he means all white people are racist - he really does need to clarify this …
and to clarify I am not a Democrat nor will I ever be a Democrat they are way to Conservative for my taste - but they are the lesser of two evils
114 - He did address Wright quite clearly and, not to put too fine a point on it, Obama is not Wright, they are two distinct entities and, even so, the associates of the other candidates appear to be even less salubrious.
116 - He did. It really is pointless carrying on the discussion if you keep refusing to accept any clarification.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/obama-attempts.html
If you didn’t like his answer above then you have to go your own way.
Yes - in that article he does a little better in trying to clarify what he meant - he really ought to be more careful in what he says - what is funny is that Hillary made a mis-step over Martin Luther King and people on this site were so quick in saying that she was racist even though she clarified it - seems if Obama does it then it is o.k. but anything Hillary does is not o.k.
He would have been better putting it in context - there is no typical white person just as there is no typical black person -
that said - his speech was amazing calling on all Americans to Unite - loved it - a clarion call -
119
Mr Obama didn’t explain his twenty years of inaction while attending Rev Wright’s church. Mr Obama does not appear to have attempted to correct, or balance Rev Wright’s ‘controversial’ views at any point. He didn’t engage Rev Wright in conversation, walk out of church during a sermon, or write an article in the church magazine. This, I would suggest, is a clear failure to show political leadership.
122 - Incorrect. Argument is pointless with those who deliberately choose not to see.
102
I am ashamed of what so many of my white brothers, and some sisters have done to my black brothers and sisters. If that makes me deeply disgusted of so many whites, then so be it. It does nothing to shake my belief that when whites and blacks and people of all colours stand together then entrenched racist ideologies will be defeated and those that profess them cannot fail to be ashamed and disgusted.
Malcolm