Home » Users » Kyle Winslow » Blog » After Wisconsin, are voters...
Democracy for America personal blog for Kyle Winslow
After Wisconsin, are voters leaning towards Obama?
The focus of Dickerson’s article “White Men Jumped” over at Slate cuts to the importance of the recent Democratic contest in Wisconsin: as in Washington, D.C., Maryland and Virginia before, Clinton lost some of her ‘base’ supporters to Barack Obama. This is not only significant because it puts wind in the sails of Obama’s uniting message, which declares that his campaign will try to bring people who effectively want to be “for something” (like change, for example) together. Especially at a time in the race when the Clinton campaign is struggling to stay afloat and therefore attacking the Orator Obama, any verification of that rhetoric will obviously boost the Illinois senator forward—and conversely slow the Clinton machine. But, aside from just the Democratic primaries, Barack Obama’s support amongst women, white voters and the working class means trouble for John McCain in the November. It is a sign that bipartisan support could happen, and it is a sign that Americans (or, so far, at least Democrats) are willing to reach for what inspires them. Though I think Dickerson’s mention of Obama interrupting Clinton’s ‘loser’ speech after the Wisconsin primary does capture some of its political significance for the Illinois senator, I think the analysis misses what was probably most disturbing for the Clinton campaign. Not only did the crowd not respond to Clinton’s “string of attacks against Obama,” showing a general tiredness with the futile remarks. But the Ohio crowd barely reacted to her policy rhetoric, which has been her stump speech and the public manifestation of her self-proclaimed annals of experience. In a word, policy rhetoric has been her campaign. It is meant to show that she is not living in a “fairly tale” herself, as President Clinton said of Obama, but has real experience dealing with real issues.
With a lack of reaction to policy-oriented stump speeches, Clinton supporters may be signaling a lack of interest in painting Barack Obama as the inexperienced candidate. The fact is that both Clinton and Obama have legislative experience in the Senate. And even their campaigns’ policy stances are similar. What’s the difference? Their message: the “steward” versus the “visionary,” as Ezra Klein notes in The American Prospect’s March issue. It is this difference that makes the Clinton speech interruption significant and even symbolic, as if to say, Breaking news: here is what actually matters. The interruption’s significance is not so much in the fact that it happened to cut off Clinton’s attacks as it is in the direct comparison of the very different moods surrounding two campaigns moving in opposite directions. And it is this kind of difference in message and difference in momentum on which Wisconsin voters, and Potomac Primary voters before them, based their choices.
Democrats to face off in must-win state for ClintonStory Highlights
Debate will air on CNN and CNN.com and in Spanish on Univision
Recent polls show Democratic race in Texas is a statistical tie
http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/
Debate set for 8:00 ET - about an hour and 20 minutes from now.
3.
Huron John
...which is not all that well represented on this blog
=======================================================
that's your opinion, John, not fact.
IMO you don't represent anything that Dean is about except knee-jerk sloganism of the boiler-plate variety.
http://www.blogforamerica.com/view/23949...
shortcut to last one
Well, I responded to my Houston sister-in-law's assertion that she's still leaning towards Hillary with the following: (Since she's now sent that 'round to her list of conversationalists, it seems fair to put it up here. Besides none of it is new to regular readers of the blog).
Good morning..........................
Elections are about the voters. I don't think their enthusiasms should be
held against them. Besides, I've been aiming to make politics as much fun
as baseball all along. Politics is an acquired taste.
What I have against Hillary Clinton is that both she and Bill were/are in
the pockets of the people who provided the seed money for Bush One and
Bush Two--a 'private' brokerage in Little Rock that seems to be the main
conduit for Rockefeller money. (We forget that, along with West Virginia
and Wyoming, Arkansas was one of those back-water states where
Rockefellers decided to settle and become big fish in little ponds. We
forget that before Clinton a Rockefeller was Governor of Arkansas and
haven't paid much notice to the fact that had he not died young, the
Rockefeller who was Huckabee's Lieutenant Governor would probably be
running instead of the Huckster himself. Those people always have
multiple horses in the race. They're not funding Hillary directly this
time, as far as I can tell. Perhaps because the New York branch has taken
on that task). It turns out that while McLarty was always described as a
Clinton boyhood friend from Hope, he was actually a Rockefeller operative
and when NAFTA was accomplished, he went back to tending the connections
with the South American countries via the Council of the Americas.
The other thing I have against her is that she was in a perfect position
to proclaim the invasion and occupation of Iraq as a gross mistake which
was actually planned during Bill's tenure in office, but which she needn't
have known about because she wasn't privy to classified information. But,
for her to do that, she would have had to admit the error of her support
for Bush Two, and she would have had to disassociate herself from the
Clinton regime and eschew her claim to "experience." None of which,
clearly, she's been willing to do. Also, she would have made certain that
Bill stayed as far from Bush One as possible.
Personally, I think Hillary Clinton should have declared herself a
Republican a long time ago. If she had, she'd be a lot less conflicted
and more comfortable with her 'les majestee' attitudes.
What I have against the corporate interests that are pushing the Clintons,
alternately with the Bushes, is that they're monopolists. Their
definition of "success" is to corner a market or a resource, not so they
can charge an arm and a leg, but so they can be in control. That's what
they're trying to do with NAFTA--use trading agreements to get monopoly
interests in SA resources. But that's not all. The latest goal is to
achieve dominance over world agricultural production via genetic
engineering by producing seed that will only be good for one year's crop
and require the purchase of more seed from the industrial producer of
such. So, instead of having to purchase fertilizer and pesticide every
year, the farmer of the future will also have to purchase seed, some of
which comes ready-laced with pesticide. Indeed, one of the first grain
deliveries to southern Iraq after the invasion made lots of people sick
because they ate the stuff instead of planting it.
Monsanto is a big player here. They've acquired a patent for the
"terminator" gene that's going to "fix" it so plants produce only one crop
and no viable seed. This was developed by an outfit called Delta and
Land, Inc by a scientist at the Rockefeller University in NY.
Their opposition to diversity is ideological. Diversity is the antithesis
of the monopolistic impulse. Equality is the antithesis of the elite.
Where egalitarians and the proponents of diversity make a mistake is in
not recognizing that the elite consider them to be the enemy.
The reason is simple. Egalitarians don't care whether some people
consider themselves superior; elites NEED someone to be inferior in order
to validate their status.
M/H
Huron John
there is support for Ed Fallon, he is a true progressive and DFA has showed their colors backing him in the primary against a middle of the road Democrat
"specifically" Hillary will ; "generally" Obama might feed the war machine is what I hear you saying seashell. I thought peace was more of a priority with you."
Enduring peace IS a priority of mine, Phil. Might is still not good enuf. He's said that he would go into Pakistan if he had "actionable intel." That's a set-up and an out should he want it. He also said something in his speech the other night about taking the fight to the terrorists or something like that. That's very aggressive. That's what bush is already doing.
Maybe I'm becoming a political isolationist.
Dean/Feingold LOL
Well, John Democracy, as in rule by the people is still pretty young. It's less than forty years that all the people even got to have a say. And we're still waiting to get all the information that belongs to us by right.
Linda is of course welcome to post pro Hillary stuff here if she wants for gawds sake, we put up with Rooney and say no to Linda? I don't think so
Smoke Free Air Act Passes House
Representative Elesha Gayman The Iowa House passed the Smoke Free Air Act by a bipartisan vote of 56-44 on Tuesday, February 19. The bill will now go before the Senate for its consideration.The intent of House File 2212 is to protect the health of Iowa employees and the public by reducing their exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke, which annually kills 440 people in Iowa and makes thousands ill. Supporters point out that second-hand smoke has 60 chemicals that cause cancer, asthma and other respiratory diseases. In addition, tobacco smoke will make many other existing conditions worse. The smoking ban would apply to all workplaces, public places, and certain outdoor areas. A workplace is any area under an employer’s control including areas frequented by an employee or volunteer, work areas, private offices, meeting rooms, classrooms, auditoriums, employee lounges and cafeterias, hallways, restrooms, elevators, stairways, and vehicles provided by the employer. Public places are any enclosed area to which the public is invited or permitted, including bars and restaurants, retail establishments, public buildings, private and public schools, daycare providers, health care providers, and private clubs when the general public is invited to an activity.Outdoor areas where smoking is banned include sports arenas, stadiums, and other entertainment venues, outdoor restaurant seating or serving areas within 10 feet of the restaurant’s door or window, public transit stations, platforms, and shelters, and school grounds..As approved, House Study Bill 616 sets up an eleven-member commission appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The purpose of the commission is to work in concert with tribal governments, Native American groups, and Native American persons in this state in the areas of human rights, access to justice, economic equality, and the elimination of discrimination.
Elesha GaymanThe CM is using the word "religious" when talking about the followers of BO. You should have seen the clip. It was embarrassing. IMO
It's evangelism - just what we don't need. I wonder how many of these screeching youths know anything about him. They appear swept up in some kind of frenzied movement..
Spooky.
10.
Phil Specht
Sorry Phil...no, other bloggers actually have stated I had nerve to post even a link.
I will save this place from any diffrent view. And they wonder why.........
I did say I was leaving and saving ya'll form the non agreeing voice, I just came back because my posts are brought up here when I'm not here anyhow....LOL
I will keep my word. LOL
Friends I have, take good care.
Congrats to IA re: not smoking
I'd like to start a movement of my own.
Phil for president! :-) Huron for VP...or maybe reversed. You decide. LOL
7:09 PM EST
having a good time:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080221/od_afp/usvotelatinoobamaoffbeat_080221234253
Viva Obama! Barack gets the Mariachi treatment
29 minutes ago
NEW YORK (AFP) - White House hopeful Barack Obama has been given a boost to his presidential campaign among Latino voters in the form of a Mexican Mariachi band singing his praises on video-sharing website YouTube.
..
They appear swept up in some kind of frenzied movement..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Gods speed.
The Obama Nation is it's own worst enemy if they are my way or the highway.
The list of 'yeas' and 'nays' offer some clues to an Obama presidency
Election madness by Howard Zinn
*****************
Today, we can be sure that the Democratic Party, unless it faces a popular upsurge, will not move off center. The two leading Presidential candidates have made it clear that if elected, they will not bring an immediate end to the Iraq War, or institute a system of free health care for all.
They offer no radical change from the status quo.
They do not propose what the present desperation of people cries out for: a government guarantee of jobs to everyone who needs one, a minimum income for every household, housing relief to everyone who faces eviction or foreclosure.
They do not suggest the deep cuts in the military budget or the radical changes in the tax system that would free billions, even trillions, for social programs to transform the way we live.
None of this should surprise us. The Democratic Party has broken with its historic conservatism, its pandering to the rich, its predilection for war, only when it has encountered rebellion from below, as in the Thirties and the Sixties. We should not expect that a victory at the ballot box in November will even begin to budge the nation from its twin fundamental illnesses: capitalist greed and militarism.
Linda in NM - For a very long time you have been one of my favorite posters - your'e advocacy for our environment and pro-Al Gore posts have been inspiring to say the least. I just think if you support Hillary (and why not) that you should post some positive pieces on her rather than some of the questionably sourced stuff on Obama. I think honey works better than vinegar sometimes. JMO.
Obama is sick so I'm not sure how he'll perform in the debate this evening. I am changing my opinion a little bit about Hillary's plan. She may stay above the fray. But I do think CNN will go after Obama big time. Rough him up - get Hillary some better poll numbers and create the horse race thingy again.
Lina NM....
Denise just likes to stir things up now and then. She used the same routine with me, then she'll innocently run to her clique for support and they'll circle the wagon. It's a game. She invites people to leave the blog or even the country. If you leave, she wins. Deny what is most wanted, attention, and ignore.
Phil, thank you. Be well.
_________________________
OK, I hung out long enough for your return. :)
23.
mary vb
Thu, 02/21/08
Linda in NM - For a very long time you have been one of my favorite posters -
---> thank you. Very kind of you to say.
I just think if you support Hillary (and why not) that you should post some positive pieces on her
---> I'm sorry you missed them. As I mentioned up thread I even was berated for posting just a link, making it clear the majority left here, one way or the highway.
My highway just won't be that NAFTA Highway coming out of Texas. :)
Phil, thank you. Be well.
_________________________
OK, I hung out long enough for your return. :)
23.
mary vb
Thu, 02/21/08
Linda in NM - For a very long time you have been one of my favorite posters -
---> thank you. Very kind of you to say.
I just think if you support Hillary (and why not) that you should post some positive pieces on her
---> I'm sorry you missed them. As I mentioned up thread I even was berated for posting just a link, making it clear the majority left here, one way or the highway.
My highway just won't be that NAFTA Highway coming out of Texas. :)
29.
audrey.nc
I hear you big time! But it's really ok, I'm not really helping being here and I never liked being where I'm not wanted.
Thank you for your support.
I will make more use of my time in other ways.
Really, be well.
Hi, everyone. Are you watching the debates? This is the most remarkable primary and we are lucky to have two great candidates. I wish Edwards were here to mix it up. But this process can only prepare one of the them to take on the right-wing maching and win in November.
What the fuck is in the water in North Carolina?
Written in an email from H. Smith to the Democratic Party's Environmentalists list serve here: http://www.democrats.org/page/group/Demo...
---
----- Original Message -----
From: HSmith
To: Democratic Environmentalists
Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2008 3:15 PM
Subject: [DemocraticEnvironmentalists] The Future Of The Democratic Party
I have noticed that since the Iowa caucuses, the strategy of nuance and divisive politics keeps raising it's ugly head, again and again. I'm actually old enough to remember the politics of the 1990's, and it's devastating effects on the Democratic Party. The slash and burn Clinton's we knew well in the 1990's, have returned "back from the future," with a vengeance. Every democrat that remembers this political re-run, has to wonder whether the Clinton's are trying to re-destroy the new Democratic Party in 2008. The political team that now claims to "embody" "change," is seemingly very comfortable using their same old strategy of divisive politics to reclaim their throne in the White House. Anyone truly interested in the future of our Democratic Party has to be very alarmed. The Clinton's political strategy of slash and burn will serve them well now, but the eventual cost to the Democratic Party will be devastating once again. The same strategy of half-truths, nuance, right-winged conspiracies, and divisive ideological battles, that won the Clinton's the presidency in 1992, and a subsequent New York Senate seat, will cost our national and local party, seats in the 2008 upcoming elections. The last time we allowed the Clintons to lead our party, we suffered historical political losses, never seen before in American politics. The net result of the divisive, self-serving Clinton political machine of the 90's, shrank the Democratic Party base, and cost the party control of the United States Senate and the House of Representatives. The sad result of the Clinton politics, and continuous scandals, eventually empowered George W. Bush past the setting incumbent vice president, Al Gore in the 2000 presidential elections. As a result the republicans have took firm control of the Supreme Court, appointing 7 of the last 9 justices, currently serving. Looking at the complete picture, I don't believe that the Clinton administration or politics have lead, served, or is currently serving our Democratic Party well in any capacity. We have to understand, that as a democrats, we have yet to fully recover from the political damage of the Clinton administration scandals, investigations, and politics during the "1990's. As a party, if we don't learn from our past mistakes, and demand a new leadership, we will surely suffer the same devastating consequences in 2008 and beyond. We have to move forward and turn the page of division, if we are going to expand our electorate and chart a stronger, more inclusive future for the Democratic Party. Please Share This With Everyone You Know!!!
H. Smith
1st question: Fidel Castro....full of minefields here...
Clinton same old on cuba....not different from Bush and Reagan.
US leaders met with Soviet and Chinese leaders, and Clinton wouldn't meet with the leader of Cuba?
What I don't get is how you start diplomatic relations with a country with whom you don't have those relations without a dialogue with that very country?
The cheering has got to stop....it's starting to feel like a rally than a debate. Get some control there!
Denise
Thu, 02/21/08
Good point...Clinton would continue a policy of neglect and embargo. Obama would seize the moment.
Yes and in Cuba the "moment" hasn't been as excellent as it is now.
Yes they should control the cheering - it's taking time away from answers.
Everyone looks at these two through the lenses of their own support for one of them.
There isn't a huge difference on policy issues....it is a matter of how you make the necessary changes. That's Obama's point about taking on special interests.
Wow she just said she'd freeze interest rates (on mortgages) for five years. That is very interesting. I wonder if she thought that one out very well.
Denise
Thu, 02/21/08
I like the enthusiasm, but it will degenerate into each group trying to beat the other with louder applause. Now cheers and whistles. Pretty soon an air horn!! Battle of the applause lines.
Airhorn....lol...like a Bulls game.
(Or Pistons, Kings, Warriors take your pick bloggie)
oops, I TIVOd mine for a phone call and now I"m a minute behind....need a commercial to catch up, denise!!
Clinton says path to legalization, not citizenship. There's a difference....
Oh man the fence question
I just watched a portion of the debate. Hillary always comes across as commanding. However, I thought Obama was more gracious in mentioning his admiration of Clinton. She didn't do that to him. Also, I liked his response about diplomacy. Clinton's response was too much like Bush's.
Hillary isn't attacking Obama. I think she's trying to make her points without going after him. This makes her more likable to me anyway. In my mind - she can gain points with this style.
Any other thoughts out there?
Oooh....she's getting booed for that Xerox comment.
Words you can Xerox after he just explained the whole Deval Patrick thing? Which was a dumb waste of time to even ask about it in the first place.
We'll see that all over the toob as an outtake.
Finally got the live streaming to work on CNN.com. Got here just in time for Hillary to accuse Barack of plagarism. Don't you feel safer now?
She's also overly enunciating like a Foxpert. She's sounding parental and is putting words in Barack's mouth.
I'm voting for Barack for one more new reason. He has the patience of a saint.
Perhaps I spoke too soon. Just read over at Kos that Hillary brought up the Stump the Chump interview with Matthews but that Obama hit it out of the park. As my brother would say *I just hit a nice tater*. LOL
http://www.blogforamerica.com/view/23948...
new thread
I can't believe BO is playing the fear card. ...
"strongest military in the world" "keep you safe"
Yikes! Bad move, BO.
Wow she just said she'd freeze interest rates (on mortgages) for five years. That is very interesting. I wonder if she thought that one out very well.
The last person to try something that stupid was Richard Nixon.
Same questions, same answers but I heard BO say that his highest priority as prez would be to keep us SAFE. Sorry, BO, there is no safety. My highest priority is to be FREE. And then he went on about the military and best in the world. Too much testosterone and he's sounding quite militant.
On health care, HC wins.
On Iraq and foreign policy, HC wins. MO
But barely. But this safety thing really perked up my ears.
I think H. Smith's words above concerning Democratic nuanced bickering are true. I also think that is why it would be better if Texas and Ohio decided the Dem.'s candidate.
So Seashell, if you weigh the two candidates-the more better the heavier-now, at this moment.
Which would be heavier?
So we have Kyl-Lieb..........a big minus for Hillary. Her priorities as prez would be health care, education, women and a few things I can't remember.
His priority as prez is to keep us safe. ...a big minus for him IMO
Then we have the "strongest military in the world" cr!p and his willingness to go into Pakistan w/o being invited. THAT is very dangerous. What happens if he's given bad intel on purpose?
If either is more a warmongerer than the other, I think BO would qualify.
Perhaps there is something to the differences between and man and a woman. His testosterone oozed when talking about the military. She has softened and mellowed and become very gracious.
That said,
Dodd/Feingold
A point on the NYTIMES 'Cain article.
It was not about a extra-marital affair!
So, I guess the big hubala blah blah is just Republican talking points
they've know about this article since December
and had determined that the best course of action in surrounding 'Cain is to distract the public (IE spin the story into an affair)
The story is about lobbyists and legislation and politicians and 'Cain
Add your comment
(to reply directly to a comment, click the reply icon for that comment)Post closed to commenting
Videos of some of the 64 House Healthcare Heroes standing strong for a public health insurance option
Congressman Emanuel Cleaver
Congressman Lloyd Dogget
Congressman Keith Ellison
Congressman Bob Filner
Congressman Phil Hare
Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey
Congresswoman Maxine Waters
Blog for America
-
1 Turncoat Senator vs. 410,649 Americans
By Mary R on Nov 19, 2009 3:06 PM EST -
Send a message they can't miss
By Mary R on Nov 17, 2009 12:00 PM EST -
Will the real Democrat please stand up?
By Mary R on Nov 11, 2009 2:03 PM EST -
3 Million and Counting
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:47 PM EST -
Is Sen. Nelson listening to Nebraska?
By Mary R on Nov 6, 2009 12:31 PM EST
Recent Blog Posts
-
Dreams wow gold
By wow gold w on Nov 22, 2009 3:17 AM EST -
the Psychobiology talk about the pc wow gold game
By wow gold w on Nov 21, 2009 11:39 PM EST -
Spring Trend 2009 Abercrombie & Fitch
By Abercrombie F on Nov 21, 2009 9:44 PM EST -
Vacationing?
By Phoenix V on Nov 21, 2009 2:07 PM EST -
Bags And Shoes Gucci or Louboutin
By Buy l on Nov 21, 2009 2:37 AM EST
-
By Huron John on Feb 21, 2008 6:56 PM ESTTrue progressives are first--that includes Howard and the "Democratic Wing" of the Democratic Party, which is not all that well represented on this blog.
6:14 pm