Why Obama is avoiding West Virginia, Kentucky
Dante Chinni
Posted: 05.12.2008 / 10:59 AM EDT
Last Tuesday’s Democratic primary results in Indiana and North Carolina did not give Sen. Barack Obama the nomination, but he definitely has been acting a lot more like the party’s nominee since then.
His speeches now focus more intently on presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain. He has demurred on requests to debate his Democratic opponent, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Perhaps most telling, he has apparently concluded that he can afford to mostly skip campaigning for Tuesday’s West Virginia primary.
In fact, Mr. Obama seems to have written off the May 20 contest in Kentucky as well, calling Mrs. Clinton’s lead in the two states “insurmountable.”
Not that Obama has declared victory in the presidential nomination fight; he will campaign in Oregon, which also holds its primary May 20.
A look at how the Patchwork Nation community types break down in those three states shows why Obama is making the choices he is. The fact is that the voter communities in those states are likely to yield Clinton victories no matter how much time and money he pours into them. Her “insurmountable” lead is a result of the demographic splits between Clinton and Obama voters that have appeared throughout the primary season.
Consider West Virginia: The Mountain State has about 1.8 million people, and 60 percent of them live in voter community types that have been favorable for Clinton in the Democratic primaries: rural farm communities (“Tractor Country”), counties with younger families and many evangelical adherents (“Evangelical Epicenters”), hubs for service industries (“Service Worker Centers”), and places with slightly older populations (“Emptying Nests”).
West Virginia has none of Obama’s two most reliable community types, big cities (“Industrial Metropolis”) and places with sizeable African-American populations (“Minority Central”). The representation of college towns (“Campus & Careers”) is a decent size, accounting for 20 percent of residents, but those communities have not always been as reliable for him as the first two.
Kentucky also holds problems for Obama, with a massive base of voters living in “Evangelical Epicenters” – more than 33 percent – and another 16 percent living in “Emptying Nests,” which has been Clinton’s most reliable voter community type. Doing the math, that means roughly half the state is predisposed to go for Clinton. Her edge becomes bigger than half when the 4 percent of the voters who live in “Tractor Country” are added in.
Obama has decided to campaign in Oregon in large part because the state’s voter community types look more favorable for him.
People in “Monied ’Burbs” make up about 28 percent of Oregon’s population, and many of them live in Obama’s kinds of ’burbs – “often quite liberal, due to the whole green-granola factor,” says James Gimpel, a government professor at the University of Maryland, College Park, and Patchwork Nation’s consultant. The state’s “Campus & Career” population, about 11 percent of the total, also tends to lean to the left, which should serve the Illinois senator well.
Maybe most important, Oregon has no “Emptying Nests” counties, which will probably hurt Clinton.
And though the “Evangelical Epicenter” population in the state is large, it is atypical, including a large subsection of members of the Mormon Church. (To keep the community types in Patchwork Nation manageable, we placed Oregon’s Mormons in the “Evangelical Epicenter” category.)
In fact, the Mormon Church has the second largest number of members in the state behind the Roman Catholic Church, according to the website Adherents.com. Historically, parts of the Church of Latter Day Saints’ “Mormon Trail” closely mirror parts of the Oregon Trail.
Because Oregon’s “Evangelical Epicenters” have such a different makeup compared with those outside the state, they may not follow the pro-Clinton voting patterns of other counties in that community type.
An examination of these community types and the voting patterns reveals that both candidates have a case to make over the next few weeks.
If Clinton wins in West Virginia and Kentucky, as expected, she will probably pound home her point that white working-class voters are with her, not Obama, and that she therefore has the best chance of winning in the general election.
But Obama can counter with a big “electability” point of his own.
West Virginia and Kentucky went for President Bush in 2004 by huge margins – 13 percentage points and 20 percentage points, respectively – and their voter makeups may make it hard for any Democrat in 2008.
Oregon was a relatively close win for Sen. John Kerry in 2004: four percentage points. It’s a state Democrats must keep in their column if they are to win the White House in November. If Obama wins it May 20, you can bet that’s something he’ll be touting.
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
May 12th, 2008 at 5:55 pm EDT
Maybe Obama is not trying very hard to reduce her win to give Hillary a “graceful” win? Hillary leaving after a big win would make her look better. Hillary has not shown any evidence of caring whether a Democrat wins in the November election.
Maybe it is a matter of conserving resources considering the small number of delegates.
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
May 12th, 2008 at 6:12 pm EDT
I think Hillary is staying in the race to inflict the most possible damage, while at the same time creating an image of herself as a fighter. There would be no advantage for her own ambitions if she left the race now. This way she can run again in 4 years if Obama loses in the fall; she would be too old to run in 2016.
This time around the Clinton camp will not have the argument that the Obama camp is pouring in resources and still loses by a significant margin. I think Obama’s strategy to focus on McCain and the general election is the right one at this point.
May 12th, 2008 at 6:26 pm EDT
West Virginia primary voters 48 years ago had the courage and wisdom to vote for John F. Kennedy. That WV primary was a turning point in US history, proving Protestant voters would accept a Roman Catholic, i.e. someone different. While the polls don’t look favorable, it would be inspiring if some WV voters today showed open-mindedness by voting for Sen. Obama, whose race happens to be mixed African and Caucausian, i.e. someone different. In other words, people don’t have to be a prisoner of demographics, but can vote based on candidates’ leadership, ability and values.
Obama is a brilliant leader with core Democratic values. He has shrewd insight into some of our toughest issues (energy, nuclear proliferation, war & peace, veterans, etc.), Much more than Clinton or McCain, Obama is capable of leading us into the 21st century.
May 12th, 2008 at 6:31 pm EDT
Just maybe Hillary is staying in the race because in this country the rule is “One man(woman), one vote.”. A person’s right to vote is not to be dismissed because of race, creed, etc., and that vote should count equally with all others, within the confines of our representative system of government. All those people who feel disenfranchised by the gaming of the system, “You are right”. Hillary is not the enemy, she is the “last one standing” in defence of your rights to vote Forcing her to quit early is part of the strategy of the ‘Gaming”. Think about it.
May 12th, 2008 at 6:38 pm EDT
Many of these posters remind me of the republicans in 2000. Republicans ate their own and eviscerated John McCain with slanders, hints of conspiracy and attributed to him the most vile behaviour - all of it later debunked and shown to be the work of Karl Rove. Fast forward to 2008 and the oh-so-civilized democrats. Now it’s the turn of the first viable female candidate to be abused from within her party.
In both cases, despite years of service to their parties, viable candidates are reviled by frenemies. Oddly enough, or not, both McCain and Clinton do not tend to vote from the fringes of their respective parties. Their very longevity and history make for arguments against them by those who disagree. Fair enough. However, it is interesting to note that the man who defeated McCain in 2000 and the almost-presumptive democratic candidate this time around are very similar. Neither had much of a history, neither took firm stands on issues and both talked about their “vision” of the future, promising politics as “usual” will be forever banned.
As if. Regardless of party preference, we do seem to be locked into a pattern of choosing newbies who have little to show, thus less to argue over, for all their vaunted ability to be “uniters.” Anyone remember the man who was “a uniter, not a divider?”
Whatever. The least democrats could do is acknowledge the contributions of Senator Clinton and treat her with some respect due a party elder. But apparently the least is still too much in a party quite happy to bet on promises rather than stand on accomplishments.
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
[Admin: Readers don't think this comment adds to the discussion.]
May 12th, 2008 at 8:03 pm EDT
I support Barack Obama, and I think he’ll make a wonderful President. He brings hope and optimism to the people. He will bring all factors together more successfully than anyone else has been able to do. Michelle will be a elegant and smart first lady.
God’s speed, Mr. Obama~
May 12th, 2008 at 8:24 pm EDT
First of all, I find it amusing that Clinton supporters here bash Obama supporters as being anti-Clinton and then follow it with nastiness (which seems sort of doublespeak) or accusations of “playing the race card.”
As far as Senator Clinton being a party elder, I don’t recall her years of political experience being more vast than Senator Obama nor do I recall her particular accomplishments being more vast. I also don’t term Senator Obama a “newbie” considering he was in my states legislature before he represented my state in the United States Senate.
We are all welcome to support the candidate we feel best represents our views and I feel Senator Obama best represents mine. I don’t feel I have to belittle Senator Clinton to express that support and find it very pathetic that supporters of either candidate would find name calling and accusations the best way to indicate that support.
Here’s to the optimism of a new politics and a new president.
Obama ‘08
May 12th, 2008 at 8:35 pm EDT
I’m a Republican for Obama, and hope that he will move us beyond not just rich and poor, young and old, black, brown or white, but also beyond Republican and Democrat. I’m tired of the “fight” motif, tired of people who think that if you disagree with them, you must be not just wrong but a bad person as well - all the tired old politics we have dealt with for so many years. I hope Obama can do it differently. He has certainly behaved with dignity and class during some difficult moments.
I hope W. Virginia will show some interest in the future tomorrow, and vote accordingly, even if it votes by a large margin for the past.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:21 pm EDT
President Barack Obama has a healthier ring than another Clinton administration. After Monicagate and an undeclared war on the Serbian people, the other Clinton paved the way for George W. Bush and all his disasters. Another Clinton is the wrong prescription. By mounting a brilliant campaign against the most powerful political dynasty in Ameria, Obama has demonstrated the strategic skill essential for a successful president.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:23 pm EDT
I enjoy CSM’s unique analysis of this election and this particular analysis of the outcome of voting in certain states. Why an objective analysis would prompt an outpouring of negatives about Hillary (I’m assuming the deleted posts were about her as well), I fail to understand. Since Hillary supporters vote and are voting for her because of her positives (all politicians have both positives and negatives), Obama’s supporters would be wise to follow the advice of my mother–if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all. Of course my mother is of a more polite era. Perhaps that is why she wonders why people have not supported the candidacy of a woman. She thinks from her vantage point of seeing many presidents come and go that it is time for a woman in the White House. I agree.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:44 pm EDT
I find Clinton’s argument that white working class voters support her ridiculous. How would she explain all the other states that Obama has been able to win, like Idaho, Nebraska, Iowa. My point is the race is coming to a close and since Clinton already failed to get enough votes to put her in the lead after most of the states have already voted, I see no logical reason how anyone can make the argument that her winning these few remaining states (which are far too little and too little) is proof that she should get the nomination.
May 12th, 2008 at 9:59 pm EDT
Jedi Obama mind control. How could Obama help the people in need in Chicago when he can’t keep a list of paper with their name on it, One of the best lying lawyers I have ever heard. The next best non lawyer is GWB. As an Independent Obama is full of BS, Hillary stay as long as you can, let the last vote count. If the people in Iowa knew what is known about Obama then it would have been Edwards.
May 12th, 2008 at 10:00 pm EDT
I am from WV, however I am a supporter of Obama. What makes me different than most of my counterparts here? College education is only a small factor. Religion is the big factor. I watched it happen with George Bush and I see it happening again. People here don’t want to vote for Obama because many STILL think he is either a Muslim or is somehow associated with Islam. I have actually had people here tell me that he is from Indonesia and therefore is an Arab, not a black. When I explained his father was from Kenya (African) and his mother was white (european Origin) they didn’t believe me and insisted the “reporters” know more than I do. I tried on many occasions to clarify his time in Indonesia, his step-father being Indonesian (which by the way are Asian, not Arabs, once again they insist that we are playing with the enemy by electing Obama. Another problem here in WV is that these same religious adherents claim that since Obama’s minister preaches hate, they would not vote for him, because they somehow believe that makes Obama sympathetic to “terrorists” and won’t be on the side of Israel, which they feel is requirement for any president of this country. Once again, they get thier justification of this from “reporters” and biblical prophecy. People here are not voting for Hillary because they think she can get the job done, they are not even addressing the issues. They are far more concerned about “religious justifications” rather than making rational decisions.
As for my personal opinion, I am not voting for Hillary because of her track record in voting directly contradicts they very positions she is justifying now in this election. She cannot be trusted and does not have concrete thoughts on how to address any of the major issues that are facing both our country and the global community.
Obama does.
Some people on the other hand feel that “IT IS TIME FOR A WOMAN” to be elected. If there was a woman running for president right now that was better than Obama on these major issues I would vote for them. However there is not. We have Hillary and Hillary is a risk, not a choice. She is just as much of a risk as John Mccain because of how she makes her decisions. We don’t need another president making decisions similar to how Mr. Bush made decisions.
We shouldn’t be saying “It is time for a woman” or “It is time for a black man” or anything of that sort. We should be saying “It is time for a president with a measured approach to complicated issues who has the ability to engage in dialogue with both our friends and our enemies to resolve critical issues that will demand cooperation from the entire global community.”
Because indeed almost every major issue we have right now “REQUIRES” cooperation from the entire international community. And we can get that cooperation by military force.
May 12th, 2008 at 10:02 pm EDT
My last comment should end with “WE CAN’T” get that cooperation by military force.
May 12th, 2008 at 10:20 pm EDT
I think that Senator Clinton should seriously consider a run as a third party presidential candidate; so that her voters have the opportunity to support her in the general election. Her so called “friends” like Richardson, Dodd, and Congressman John Lewis have abandoned her; so why should she continue to be a “loyal” Democrat? It is better for her to run as a third party candidate who exhibits the best of Democratic values, than to run only as a Democrat. If she loses as a third party candidate, she will still be in the senate until 2012.
HILLARY SHOULD USE HER BIG WINS IN WV AND KY TO LAUNCH HER THIRD PARTY CANDIDACY! I think that she could win.
May 12th, 2008 at 11:02 pm EDT
It’s over. Sen. Obama is giving Hillary Clinton wide berth in determining when and how she exits and I think that’s the right thing to do.
May 13th, 2008 at 12:25 am EDT
We need cooperation from the international community, and we need it yesterday. Global warming and dwindling resources aren’t going to go away as problems, they aren’t going to be solved through military force. Matter of fact, the money we spend on our military, is money not being spent on finding a way to make it so Antarctica doesn’t melt, displacing a quarter of the planets populations, while simultaneously flooding most of our major ports. Que a major humanitarian crisis and the destruction of our ability to move goods by sea. This is all ignoring the fact that the world will become increasingly involved in a global war (maybe cold, maybe hot) over the dwindling oil, coal, natural gas, and mineral reserves.
These problems will not go away, and they will not be solved by war hawks, which Clinton and McCain are both selling themselves as. I voted for Obama because he’s the only one who I think might give us a slim hope of achieving a sustainable energy policy. My hopes aren’t that high really, presidents don’t impose massive changes to society unless people demand it loudly. But hey, I’m allowed to dream right?
May 13th, 2008 at 2:28 am EDT
it’s not over until she says it’s over. Delegates vote at the convention and none of them will reach the magic number before. What’s the rush to bully her out? She might not win the nomination .. but they both deserve the credit for running a very close and the most exciting primary campaign in years.
May 13th, 2008 at 2:55 am EDT
Don’t bother posting anything here unless you praise Obama. My comment was removed as inappropriate by readers, as were a number of Hillary supporters. I expect this to be removed very shortly as well.
May 13th, 2008 at 5:10 am EDT
As an independant, I find all this funny. Senator Obama has been his own worst enemy, avoiding campaigning is the smartest thing he can do in those states, because he won’t continue to say things like “typical white person who crosses the street to avoid someone who is different”, and “embracing guns and religion to overcome their lack of faith in government”, and things such as these.(I realize I may not have the quotes perfect, but am pretty sure I have the point) I personally don’t like any of the candidates, and will most likely hold my nose when I vote. But after early consideration of him, I have decided I can not support Senator Obama, so if he does win, I supposed I will have to vote for McCain. If Hillary wins, I am not sure. My wife is the Republican judge of elections where I live, and in our private conversations, even she is considering voting for Hillary if she wins. In my view, she has turned the tide after giving up an early lead, and she continues to win major states while Senator Obama only wins when he has elections in states that have large cities with poor populations in them. I am sure McCain will love it if Senator Obama wins, because he has a far better chance of defeating him this fall. For me personally, Senator Obama would be a repeat of President Carter, an economic disaster for our country. Those of you who remember 1978 - 1982 know what I am talking about.
May 13th, 2008 at 5:30 am EDT
These are great comments. Whichever side we decide to be don’t lets be sentimental, but objective to the core. Lets stop all these insinuating what we are not sure of all because of politics and our desperation for a win. For over 46years we all know Obama to be a patriotic American, a known christian and an adhent democrat. Why does he now turn to be a muslim all of a sudden? For the love of America and Americans lets be objective in all our doings. I love you all. Cheers!!!!!!!!
May 13th, 2008 at 5:34 am EDT
There will be no election. Sometime before the election Jesus will come in the clouds of Heaven but will not walk on this earth like the first time although there will be a counterfeit who will. Every “system” in this world of sin is broken. Babylon has fallen but will have “one hour” of triumph before the 4th angels message of Revelation 18 is given to the whole earth which will be lightened with God’s glory (love and moral power) Amen Even so Come Lord Jesus!!!
May 13th, 2008 at 6:08 am EDT
Obama’s chief political adviser David Alexrod on National Public Radio claimed white working class Democrats barely exist and hardly matter, white working class has gone to the Republican nominee for many elections, This is not new WE don’t need or rely solely on those votes.
Obama is unapologetic, even dissing of voters in Florida and Michigan one has to wonder what groups of Americans he really respects?
Reason Obama said he wanted to be President of ALL 57 states. Only problem U.S. doesn’t have 57, but…Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) is an international organization grouping fifty seven states which have decided to pool their resources together, combine their efforts, and speak with one voice to safeguard the interests and secure the progress and well-being of their peoples and of all Muslims in the world.
Racist wife, Michelle, saying she was proud of America “for the first time” only because of her husband’s presidential run.
Obama explained he doesn’t wear an American flag lapel pin or hold his hands to his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance because it is a substitute for patriotism,
May 13th, 2008 at 6:09 am EDT
Obama wants to impose 20% tax on cost of Barrel Of Oil Above $80 which again drives up Cost Of Gasoline On Americans! why doesn’t Obama Acknowledge Fuel Costs For Truckers Hurt The American Consumer? Increasing Cost Of Everything Including Food, Retail, And Manufactured Goods.
Obama Claims That He Does Not Accept Contributions From Federal Lobbyists, records show he has accepted $128,000 From Lobbyists and $1.3 million from PACs, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama calls For Higher Income Taxes, Social Security Taxes, Investment Taxes, And Corporate Taxes, As Well As “Massive New Domestic Spending and a healthcare plan that perhaps could be the next step to a full-scale, single-payer system.
Obama Pandered To MoveOn.org By Promising Not To Fund Troops In Iraq In The Future. “Eli Pariser, [MoveOn.org’s] Executive Director, told ABC news but Obamas senate record shows he voted against bringing troops home, voted for war appropriations giving our money to Halliburton and Blackwater, voted with Bush/Chaney posturing S433 to suspend any troop withdrawal which keeps the troops in Iraq for a long time to come.
Obama won the endorsement of the Teamsters earlier this year after privately telling the union he supported ending the strict federal oversight imposed to root out corruption.
Obama Said The U.S. Needs To Focus On Afghanistan, Obama has held Zero hearings as Chairman Of The Subcommittee On European Affairs. “Doubts about Barack Obama’s presidential credentials have crystallized over his stewardship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s Subcommittee on European Affairs, which has convened no policy hearings since he took over as its chairman last January.
Obama inconsistent explaining how Genocide in Iraq would affect his plan for withdrawal: Ambassador Crocker said that a quick withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq could result in genocide and if that began to emerge as an issue, would you stop the withdrawal?” Obama: of course. Obama Previously Said Preventing Genocide Would Not Be A Sufficient Reason To Remain In Iraq.
Why Is Barack Obama Silent On SEIU Attacks After Denouncing Similar Independent Expenditures Earlier In The Primaries? Labor Unions And Other Independent Groups Have Already Spent Over $7.1 Million In Support Of Obama’s Campaign for the presidential nomination, campaign records show.
May 13th, 2008 at 6:30 am EDT
According to the picture on the page, Senator Obama did indeed campaign in West Virgina. He also shot pool while he was there.
The reason that the Obama campaign doesn’t carry similar debt to the Clinton campaign, is that they are prudent about where they spend their money, time, and similar resources.
West Virginia voters are Mrs. Clinton’s base. Predominately white, not college educated, few minorities.
Mrs. Clinton will win West Virginia, and Kentucky, and perhaps Puerto Rico.
Senator Obama will win Oregon. The math won’t change. Mrs. Clinton will still not be within reach of the nomination.
May 13th, 2008 at 6:55 am EDT
In 2000, there was a heavy campaign about change. Change of the white house, change of bringing significance in America, change in bringing back the American dream. Yes, it was George Bush that campaigned on change in 2000. The word change perks up our ears and we are enthusiastic about change. However, many of us do not face the consequences of change. Many of us, point fingers, point blame onto others when ‘change’ does not occur. So, respect your own vote and stand by your vote. If your candidate faults, do not point blame or your finger at anyone or any other party. Stand up and declare yes, I did hire him/her and I take blame for the fault. There is not shame to that. With the current things that are going around, I don’t blame George Bush or congress for the problems, the voters that voted him in have the same blame as any. Shocking to hear, but its true.
In West Virginia, Kentucky, and the upcoming contests needs to be done and should be done. We are the United States of America and the last time I checked, we had 50 states and territories. So, let those in West Virginia, Kentucky and all the other contests have their say. Its enchanting to see this process plays out. These upcoming contests also have history that shapes our country, let them speak.
No matter what anyone says about Hillary Clinton, you must give her the respect that she deserves. She was pummeled by the media, by her opponents, and she is still fighting. She was written off for dead in Iowa and she is still standing now. That deserves alot of respect. At the same end, we must also give respect to Senator Obama for paving the way for African Americans men and women.
In the end, we might not agree on many things, but we must take responsibility for our votes and I am sure the upcoming contests, the voters will stand by their vote. You stand by yours and I will stand by mine.
May 13th, 2008 at 9:24 am EDT
Why is it that when Senator Clinton made those comments to ABC about hard-working Americans, white Americans, and wrote those off as a poor choice of words it was accepted as such. However, when Senator Obama used “bitter” instead of “angry/frustrated” and “cling” instead of “rely on”, Senator Clinton pounced on them and labeled him as an elitist. Senator Obama’s poor choice of words no more make him an elitist who looks down on small-town people than Senator Clinton’s make her a racist who looks down on African Americans while being condescending to blue collar white people??
May 13th, 2008 at 9:36 am EDT
After all is said and done, the Democratic nominee will be Sen. Obama, most likely. I am a supporter of Sen. Obama and I have the utmost respect for Sen. Clinton. However, it saddens me to see people on here, Democrats nonetheless, state wholeheartedly that they’d never vote for Sen. Obama, when both Democratic candidates hold essentially the same views on a myriad of issues. How can one say they are a Democrat and vow to vote for McCain out of spite for Sen. Obama. My future is important to me and it hurts to see this division, hatred and gross prejudism creep into the American people. I can’t deal with a McCain term as president, so if tomorrow Sen. Obama dropped out the race, i would gladly vote for Sen. Clinton. Let’s drop the anger and become united and realistic. The fact that you can post on this website implies you have access to a wealth of knowledge, privy to the facts. Why then are so many people so angry. Let’s together lift our country up!
May 13th, 2008 at 10:05 am EDT
IT’S ABOUT ELECTABILITY !!!
MY FELLOW “BITTER”, STUPID, WORKING CLASS PEOPLE
If you think like Barack Obama, that WORKING CLASS PEOPLE are just a bunch of “BITTER”!, STUPID, PEASANTS, Cash COWS!, and CANNON FODDER.
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think Barack Obama with little or no experience would be better than Hillary Clinton with 35 years experience.
You Might Be An Idiot!
husband (Bill Clinton) led the greatest economic expansion, and prosperity in American history.
If you think that Obama with no experience can fix an economy on the verge of collapse better than Hillary Clinton. Whose
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think that Obama with no experience fighting for universal health care can get it for you better than Hillary Clinton. Who anticipated this current health care crisis back in 1993, and fought a pitched battle against overwhelming odds to get universal health care for all the American people.
You Might Be An Idiot!
husband (Bill Clinton) went to war only when he was convinced that he absolutely had to. Then completed the mission in record time against a nuclear power. AND DID NOT LOSE THE LIFE OF A SINGLE AMERICAN SOLDIER. NOT ONE!
If you think that Obama with no experience can manage, and get us out of two wars better than Hillary Clinton. Whose
You Might Be An Idiot!
husband (Bill Clinton) left office with the greatest amount of environmental cleanup, and protections in American history.
If you think that Obama with no experience saving the environment is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose
You Might Be An Idiot!
husband (Bill Clinton) made higher education affordable for every American. And created higher job demand and starting salary’s than they had ever been before or since.
If you think that Obama with little or no education experience is better than Hillary Clinton. Whose
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think that Obama with no experience will be better than Hillary Clinton who spent 8 years at the right hand of President Bill Clinton. Who is already on record as one of the greatest Presidents in American history.
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think that you can change the way Washington works with pretty speeches from Obama, rather than with the experience, and political expertise of two master politicians ON YOUR SIDE like Hillary and Bill Clinton..
You Might Be An Idiot!
If you think all those Republicans voting for Obama in the Democratic primaries, and caucuses are doing so because they think he is a stronger Democratic candidate than Hillary Clinton.
Best regards
jacksmith… Working Class
p.s. You Might Be An Idiot!
If you don’t know that the huge amounts of money funding the Obama campaign to try and defeat Hillary Clinton is coming in from the insurance, and medical industry, that has been ripping you off, and killing you and your children. And denying you, and your loved ones the life saving medical care you needed. All just so they can make more huge immoral profits for them-selves off of your suffering…
You see, back in 1993 Hillary Clinton had the audacity, and nerve to try and get quality, affordable universal health care for everyone to prevent the suffering and needless deaths of hundreds of thousands of you each year.
Approx. 100,000 of you die each year from medical accidents from a rush to profit by the insurance, and medical industry. Another 120,000 of you die each year from treatable illness that people in other developed countries don’t die from. And I could go on, and on…
OBAMA AIDE: “WORKING-CLASS VOTERS NOT KEY FOR DEMOCRATS”
May 13th, 2008 at 10:38 am EDT
Isn’t it strange on how in a first world country (developed country) people falsify simple truths to their advantage and others blindly without checking accept those lies.I have seen in a couple of blogs post purporting that Obama said ” he wanted to be president of 57 states” is this post a viral post from the same retarded guy(s)/group or its a propaganda statement from some “bright” fellows hoping to influence the stupid masses?
The video is there for all to see. He simply said (slip of the tongue) that” I have been to 57 states……….”
So what do these guys drink or smoke?
May 13th, 2008 at 10:57 am EDT
BO obviously thinks that it is not important to be president of people, rather he wants to be president of states. Nobody can afford to give up a state without fighting. To be a president, you can’t back down from challenges no matter your odd especially when you have the time and money to do so.
It is despicable to give up on people. BO has made the biggest mistake that he cares more about maths than people.
It makes you sick when you have someone trying to steal the nomination instead of winning it. That makes the nomination so much manipulated that new rules time after time are made up to suit BO. You may make new arguments but not new rules; that is exactly most of the party leaders and BO’s campaign have been doing.
Superdelegates like Joe Andrew trying to influence and stop further primary votings have been nothing but biased and working against the democrates. Over 60% of democrates want the race to continue while clowns like Joe Andrew tried his best to work against it. It is a sickening feeling that the party is in the wrong hands.
May 14th, 2008 at 3:03 am EDT
I am stunned at how many people have not bothered to understand the electoral system and display this in blogs. Hillary cant run as a 3rd party candidate this year any more than she could run as a D and an Republican for the same office the same year! And as for who is financing the campaigns, its a matter of public record! Obama has gotten more from small donors. If someone is a secretary working for an auto insurance agency, and puts that down as required for campaign financing reports, it will likely be counted as a contribution from someone in “the insurance industry”. Good grief! That is not the same as the big money Clinton has gotten from lobbyists. Check your facts, people!
The Democratic Party and the Republican Party make rules on how their own party nominates their candidate for President in their respective primaries.
The reason that the nominee is often very clear before all primaries take place is due to the timing of the primaries and the decisions of the candidates as to when to call it quits. Most candidates know when they are so behind or their message is not being responded to or they cant get financial support or all three things are true and then drop out. Rarely does a candidate willingly leave millions of dollars of debt outstanding (not paying salaries or paying hotel bills,catering, services etc,) and also loan $10 million to their campaign out of their own personal wealth..and keep on when its obvious that they are way way behind. Hillary Clinton has done both t those things. She is still in the race only because she is wealthy and is not bothered by gambling she can run with her own millions and continue without paying her bills….. Barak Obama did not make the rules but simply played by them and raised the money,and did not spend more than he raised. He also has only a fraction of the personal wealth of the Clintons. As far as I am concerned, he has behaved admirably and prudently. The party leaders by the way were mostly Clinton people and have been the slowest to switch to Obama. Obama now has the most Superdelegates from the elected categories as well as the most elected delegates from the states, the most states and the most popular votes… It is Clinton who supported the party rules until she realized that she NEEDED Michigan and Florida delegates and could not win without them and wants now to forget the rules she swore to uphold.
May 16th, 2008 at 6:32 pm EDT
Hmmm, errrr,
Not to write off the whole state, but the folks I grew up with that live there are not interested in any differing perspectives. I called my childhood friends in Kentucky to discuss the race (I am an obimacan transplanted from ky to Ca). My best girlfriend’s husband, a racist, made it clear he won’t vote for a black man. While she is not racist and is really moved by Obama’s speaches, she’s worried he’s the antichrist so she won’t vote for him because anyone that can move a nation must be the antichrist. My college educated sister is not voting and told me if I wanted to talk politics, not to call her, she’ can’t really be bothered with the state of our nation.
Maybe the brilliant Obama campaign knows this. I know that sounds horrid, but come the general, I trust he’ll visit there. I also wondered if it was because the chances of an attempt on his life was higher in those states with Clinton type populations.
May 16th, 2008 at 6:34 pm EDT
It’s very confusing to me, the very people Obama has made it his mission in life to help are the ones wanting to elect a know, proven liar who’s husband has committed many crimes. I am completely befudled.
elyce