Pundits are starting to own up to the reality we’ve reached since March 4th: Barack Obama can’t win the general election in the fall, because he cannot win battleground states Democrats NEED to win to keep John McCain out of the White Hose.
Hillary Clinton proved she can win in battleground states like Ohio. The next important battleground will be Pennsylvania on April 22nd.
There is a reason some states are called general election “battlegrounds.” It is because partisan identification is roughly even, or because certain groups in the electorate, such as Catholics, Hispanics or blue-collar whites, switch their allegiances — or split their votes. That’s why Clinton made so much in her victory speech about the “bellwether” nature of Ohio: “It’s a battleground state. It’s a state that knows how to pick a president. And no candidate in recent history, Democrat or Republican, has won the White House without winning the Ohio primary,” she said.
There is no papering over the depth of the problem Obama faced there. He won only five of the state’s 88 counties, an inauspicious foundation for a general election campaign. Clinton trounced him among Catholic voters, 63 percent-36 percent, according to exit polls. She beat him among voters in every income category and bested him by 14 points among those making less than $50,000 annually.
This is why Pennsylvania, which is demographically similar to Ohio — and a must-win state for Democrats in November — is considered such fertile ground for Clinton on April 22.
If Obama cannot win Pennsylvania, he has no hope of winning the general election. If Obama cannot best Clinton in Pennsylvania, with 7 weeks to convince voters he is the best choice in this race, then Obama should step aside.
As Maxine Waters would famously say, “You resign!”.
Obama can’t stomach the Majors. He is a poor sport and a complainer. He is all talk, spinning words and spinning spin into a web. He is starting to get caught in it.
Hillary is still out there working hard for the American people everyday. As of late, her plan for Afghanistan and attending the Black State of the Union.
The Sun-Times never printed this, but we got hold of it:
“Obama To Blacks: Shape Up” (March 1, 2008 issue).
Just this past week, Senator Barack Obama skipped Tavis Smiley’s Symposium to Rebuild New Orleans and the State of the Black Union. Mr. Obama’s reasoning was because he was busy campaigning. At a recent campaign rally in Texas, the same week as the skipped event, Lynn Sweet’s column reported that Mr. Obama stumped to an overwhelmingly black crowd advising them to put down their remotes and stop eating Popeye’s chicken for breakfast.
Before Super Tuesday, Senator Hillary Clinton, made a personal, verbal promise to Mr. Smiley committing to appear and speak at the events. Much has changed since her promise was made. A string of losses put Mrs. Clinton roughly 100 delegates behind Mr. Obama. She is fighting hard in Texas and Ohio, but she kept her promise to Mr. Smiley. She flew to New Orleans to speak, along with other prominent leaders of the African American community including Cornell West and Reverend Al Sharpton.
While Mr. Obama was telling black supporters at a rally to put down the remote and stop eating Popeye’s, Hillary was in New Orleans speaking about Dr. King, rebuilding infrastructure, green collar jobs and race relations in America. Mr. Obama chides blacks on their choices, while Mrs. Clinton addresses the basic needs of the black community and offers true solutions.
Aren’t we tired of being talked to and talked down to? We need action.
Sincerely, Chicago Illiniois
If something happens once, it’s perfectly forgivable. Anything imaginable, or unimaginable, can happen once. Cher won an Oscar, for crying out loud.
If something happens twice, it could just be a coincidence. Don’t read too much into it.
Three times and there’s some kind of charm. A pattern emerges.
When something happens a fourth time, that pattern, fully emerged, reveals itself with increasingly graphic detail.
And so it is with the “politics of Hope”. For all the talk of a “new kind of politics” Obama employs at his revival-styled rallies, he certainly says one thing and does, or has his surrogates do, another when the rallies are over.
The pattern so far:
( 1) Michelle Obama, his chief surrogate, much in need of a basic history lesson, claims she’s “proud of America for the first time”, because, implicitly, her husband is so warmly received at his rallies
(2) Obama refuses to answer reporters’ questions about his dealings with Big Tony Rezko and the purchase of the Obama Mansion with Rezko’s help (come on, he answered, like, eight of those questions already and wants to talk about hope some more!)
(3) Susan Rice, a top aid to Obama. took a swipe at Senator Clinton and inadvertantly admitted, on national television, that her own candidate is not ready to be president.
(4) Another Obama aid, Austan Goolsbee, secretly assured Canada that Obama was just saying one thing in the primaries but planning to do another later, in terms of renegotiating NAFTA. Obama denied any such meeting took place, but the Canadian government exposed his denial as a lie. Obama then said he didn’t know the meeting took place, proving either his poor grasp of the comings and goings around him or his poor judgement in key staff.
(5) Speaking of #4, there’s Samantha Power’s name-calling and generally foul language in the international press: and this is from Obama’s key foreign policy advisor! I’d hate to hear the mouth on his bus drivers if his top foreign policy advisor drops the f-bomb so freely in interviews.
Bascially, I’m left with the impression that the “politics of Hope” is a lot of talk, and back talk, with very little straight talk to speak of. Obama is a great razzle-dazzler, to bs sure, but it’s becoming increasingly more evident there’s just no substance to back up the dazzle.
With those few words, Barack Obama ended a Texas news conference where he had come under tough questioning about influence peddler Tony Rezko from Sun-Times columnists Carol Marin and Lynn Sweet and CBS2 reporter Mike Flannery. In fact, Obama dodged the questions.
Try to imagine President Bush, fleeing questions coming at him fast and furious over a controversy, closing a news conference by saying, “Come on, I just answered like eight questions.” Democrats in Congress and liberal interest groups would be shouting coverup. The editorial pages of the national newspapers would be thundering outrage. The late night comedians and left-wing blogs would be heaping ridicule on him.
Or contrast Obama’s avoidance strategy to John McCain’s response to what was universally considered a shoddy New York Times story. It alleged two disillusioned McCain aides eight years ago thought he might have had a romantic relationship with a lobbyist. McCain met with reporters and took every question they had about the article.
Obama is lucky the Rezko affair is a Chicago issue with which national reporters are unfamiliar. And, given what’s known today, it’s hard to see how the Rezko case could wound Obama’s political ambitions. But for that reason, it’s hard to understand his reluctance to answer questions from the Chicago investigative reporters who know the Rezko issues best.
We at HillBuzz can’t say enough about Stephanie Tubbs Jones: she is, frankly, a national treasure (and we told her so when we met her in Akron last week).
You should call her office and thank her for helping to deliver Ohio to Hillary Clinton, and also for helping provide confidence to other superdelegates to remain on Clinton’s side in the face of increasingly nasty pressure to move over to Obama.
Here is Stephanie Tubbs Jones’ contact info:
1009 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Telephone: (202) 225-7032
Facsimile: (202) 225-1339
We owe you one for Ohio, Stephanie, and are glad to see your determination and principles are being recognized by the media as well!
Player of the Week: Stephanie Tubbs Jones
As a former judge and both the first woman and the first African-American to serve as Cuyahoga County prosecutor, Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D) has never been afraid of an argument. And as the current chairwoman of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, she has grown accustomed to fending off all manner of political pressure.
That background came in handy this week, as Tubbs Jones emerged as one of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton‘s staunchest supporters — both in Ohio and in the Congressional Black Caucus — even when the chips appeared to be down for the New York senator. Clinton won Ohio’s Democratic presidential primary by 10 points on Tuesday with a big boost from Tubbs Jones, and that makes her Capitol Briefing’s Player of the Week.
Now in her fifth term in Congress, Tubbs Jones represents a Cleveland-based seat that is “by far the most politically Democratic district in Ohio,” according to the Almanac of American Politics. That put her at ground zero of Tuesday’s primary fight. When all the momentum seemed to be going Obama’s way, and civil rights pioneer Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) made big news by switching his allegiance from Clinton to Obama, the media was full of speculation that other black lawmakers might follow suit — and that Tubbs Jones might even face a primary challenge back home because her majority-black district would vote for Obama.
But Tubbs Jones held her ground, telling the Post’s Shailagh Murray, “I’m not trying to be a martyr. I think Senator Clinton is the best candidate. And the beauty of the United States of America is you have the right to have your opinion, and I have the right to my opinion.”
In the end, Tubbs Jones’ opinion carried the day in her home state. Winning cures many ills, and outweighs any pressure or criticism she might have felt from Obama supporters and fellow black lawmakers to back the Illinois senator. Blogging colleague The Fix has already named Tubbs Jones one of the “winners” of the Ohio-Texas two-step for her steadfast support of Clinton.
And Tubbs Jones has also played a part in another big story this week back here in the Capitol — the currently stalled push by House Democratic leaders to pass an ethics reform bill. The measure would create a new Office of Congressional Ethics to screen potential complaints against members and pass them to the existing ethics committee, which Tubbs Jones chairs. Though most Republicans and many Democrats have been critical of the proposal, Tubbs Jones has been publicly mum on the subject. But regardless of whether the bill passes, she will continue to be the lead player in any House ethics investigations this year.
Between the fight here in Washington over her committee and the fight back home in a crucial primary contest, Tubbs Jones has had a busy week. Fortunately for her, the next Congressional recess is just around the corner.
Rice is wrong about Hillary. Hillary is quite ready to answer the 3am phone call. As someone who has been directly involved with such calls during the Reagan, Bush, and Clinton administrations, I do know what I am talking about.
As I have said before, I have had the opportunity to brief Senator Clinton twice on terrorism and Iraq during the last three years. During the course of my career at the CIA, State Department, and as a consultant, I have briefed in one form or fashion more than 60 members of Congress, a Vice President, and a President. I have participated in briefings for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other senior military commanders. I entered my first meeting with Hillary with strong reservations about her competence (based entirely on what I had heard and read in the media). I walked out of that meeting very impressed. Hands down, I found her to be the most impressive person I had had the privilege to brief.
Why was I impressed? First and foremost, she listened. I have briefed folks who get the 1000-yard stare–they drift off and start thinking about something else. I also have briefed folks who get the panicked look from not understanding what I am talking about. Hillary was different. She listened intently, but she also grasped the substance and nuance of the issues we were discussing. Second, she asked tough questions that showed me she was genuinely searching for viable policy options. I had a similar experience with Senator Joe Biden, only that was during a hearing.
But unlike many members of Congress who rely on some aide sitting at their side to pump them with questions and information, Hillary could think on her own. She did not need “Foreign Policy for Dummies.”
Hillary also is one of the few members of Congress who understood the difference between Special Forces and and Special Operations Forces. You would be shocked at the number of Senators and Representatives who are supposed to exercise oversight of the military and do not understand this basic point.
In a recent interview with a Scottish newspaper, the Obama campaign called Hillary Clinton “a monster”, while also admitting they had “f***ed up in Ohio”. Apparently, this is how the “politics of Hope” operates: to refer to your accomplished, hardworking, and determined female opponent as “a monster”, while proving your inability to properly handle foreign diplomacy by using expletives in the international press. Is that presidential, Mr. Obama?
HillBuzz thinks America deserves better than this, and Obama supporters deserve better from their “inspirational candidate”. The “politics of Hope” boils down to a sophomoric campaign dropping the f-bomb while using childish pejoratives against a woman. Where’s the hope?
HillBuzz thinks whenever Mr. Obama throws us sour lemons like this, we should make lemonade. When his campaign calls Senator Clinton “a monster”, we hold a MONSTER MARCH MONDAY MONEY BOMB.
So, this coming Monday – March 10th, 2008 – let’s plan to contribute $20.44 to Senator Clinton’s campaign: $10 for the monster pejorative, $10 for the expletive, and .44 to seal Clinton’s spot as our 44th president. We at HillBuzz usually see a movie on the weekend and spend about $20 doing it. This weekend, we’re going to read a book instead, and send that $20.44 to Hillary on Monday.
Let’s send a message to Mr. Obama that we just won’t stand for name calling in this presidential race. The stakes are too high, the issues too important, and the consequences too dire to allow this race to be run like it’s for the sophomore student council.
Hillary Clinton’s Monster March Monday Money Bomb!
Correct me if I’m wrong here, but Obama is basing his whole candidacy on being a new kind of politician, right? He claims he is all about hope and change, or change and hope, or lemonade or something, right?
But, in an article in the March 6th edition of The Scotsman, Samantha Power, Obama’s key foreign policy aid, said the following:
“We f***ed up in Ohio. In Ohio, they are obsessed and Hillary is going to town on it, because she knows Ohio’s the only place they can win. She is a monster, too – that is off the record — she is stooping to anything. Interestingly, the people in her innermost circle seem to not mind her; I think they really love her.”
Correct me if I am wrong, but calling your oppoent a monster and using expletives in an interview doesn’t seem very hopeful. The Obama camp needs some soap to go with all that hope: to wash their mouths out with.
It boils down to this: Obama proved in Ohio that he cannot win a big primary state. He also had his chance to win a large primary state on Super Tuesday and failed there too, winning only his home state of Illinois. In large primary states like Ohio, Obama’s charms fall on deaf ears. In a general election, people who didn’t vote for him in the primary won’t vote for him again. Also, going up against John McCain will make Obama seem even more inexperienced. Obama’s supporters don’t want to admit this, but it’s true.
Obama’s supporters also like to pretend an Obama v. McCain matchup would be a repeat of Kennedy v. Nixon. But, that’s not going to happen. Kennedy ran at a time when the Baby Boomers were all coming of age — and he rode that wave of support to victory. The thing is, the Baby Boomers are now in their 60s and 70s. They sure aren’t going to let go of power yet…and there are an awful lot of Baby Boomers. The Baby Boomers will break for McCain in an Obama v. McCain matchup. However, that’s not going to happen in a Clinton v. McCain matchup.
Clinton is the only democrat who can win in the fall. Obama may have hope, but he doesn’t have a chance.