Opening the Day: McCain Campaign's Map to Victory Includes... California?

by: Matt Stoller

Wed Jun 11, 2008 at 10:17


  • Here's McCain's internal map to victory:

  • Chellie Pingree and Gerry Connolly win their primaries.

  • JLo was in Obama's office yesterday.

  • Here's Blue Dog Dan Boren going after Obama:

    Democratic Rep. Dan Boren of Oklahoma said Tuesday Barack Obama is "the most liberal senator" in Congress and he has no intention of endorsing him for the White House...

    Boren, the lone Democrat in Oklahoma's congressional delegate, said that while Obama has talked about working with Republicans, "unfortunately, his record does not reflect working in a bipartisan fashion."

    And Blue Dog Jim Cooper wants to overhaul entitlements, ie. cut Social Security and Medicare.  How come no DC insider ever discusses 'overhauling entitlements' in the context of a national health care system to take the strain off of Medicare?

  • Apparently Artur Davis earmarked funds to a community college for which his staffer consulted.  I'm going to guess that this knocks him out of contention for the cabinet.

  • Foreign sovereign wealth funds are seeking to buy the Chrysler building.

  • Bob Borosage talks about Obama 'showing his punch' on economic policy.

  • Bob Barr criticizes the War on Drugs (via John Cole):

    While it is clear the War on Drugs has been a failure, it is not enough to simply acknowledge that reality. We need to look for solutions that deal with the drug problem without costly and intrusive government agencies, and instead allow for private industry and organizations to put forward solutions that address the real problems.

What are you reading?
Matt Stoller :: Opening the Day: McCain Campaign's Map to Victory Includes... California?

Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Opening the Day: McCain Campaign's Map to Victory Includes... California? | 99 comments
ANyone... (4.00 / 2)
We need a list of ANYONE who does the shit Boren did and then bring a primary challenge.  The circular firing squad logic of STUPID democrats is shrinking but we need to purge those remaining.  Obama's building big enough state groups to bring a serious primary challenge.
I was thinking along the same (0.00 / 0)
lines (as per my comment below), except trying to figure a response that a) is less periodic and more constant, b) requires less of a commitment than running a serious primary challenge (and gives the Blue Dog a series of 'warnings,' first) and c) doesn't rely on a primary victory to win, just a threat. (Because no politician wants a well-funded primary challenger even if they're sure to win. Costs money, takes time, and is scary.)

Love to hear what you think. Explained a few comments down.

[ Parent ]
As Oklahoma is probably the LAST state Obama would carry (0.00 / 0)
I don't think this guys remarks are a big deal, but it is irritating, and I do agree we need to boot people like this who won't back the nominee.

John McCain.  Wrong for America.
[ Parent ]
I'm not even sure (4.00 / 2)
that 'booting' him is realistic. (I've absolutely no idea how entrenched he is.) I just think we need a way to put someone on this on notice; not necessarily to boot him, but to give him a major headache.

Pledges for an as-yet-undeclared primary opponent seems like a pretty easy way to do that. Even if nothing comes of the challenge, I can't imagine that any politician likes getting letters that say, 'We just raised another $5,000 in pledges against you for your latest anti-Democratic statement' every few months ...

At some point, they might learn to shut up. And after that, they might even start voting better. Well, maybe.

[ Parent ]
Another Lipinski (0.00 / 0)
Dan Boren Sr was for many years the Senator from Oklahoma.  He is Pres of the Univ of Oklahoma now, I believe.  Dan Boren Jr would not seem to be someone who could be primaried succesfully.  Maybe if Andrew Rice beats the less popular Inhofe in the Senate race (a real longshot) it would send a message.  But this isn't a good race to primary.  We need a race where the Bushdog is more conservative than the district, is corrupt and we have a great candidate.  Another Donna Edwards, in short.

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.
[ Parent ]
Agreed (0.00 / 0)
This district has a Republican lean. We won't get a progressive in a primary. Best thing to do here would be a pressure organizing campaign from within the district.

I think y'all should take a look at this post:

http://www.swingstateproject.c...

It has a good list of Democrats who are underperforming their districts. A lot of those are just people in hugely Democratic districts or people who are gearing up for statewide runs but there are a few ones who stand out as good possible targets in the future.

-Autur Davis (although it's partly beacuse he wants to win a statewide race in Alabama)

-Kendrick Meek (not that progressive in a D+35 district. Endorsed Clinton despite the district going overwhelmingly for Obama and I believe he said he won't go to the convention in protest of the Florida deal. He got his seat beacuse his mom was the rep before him. He has angered a lot of the same folks Al Wynn did and this could be another primary like that)

-Dan Lipinski. (We need a better candidate then Pera though and no split change vote. We also need to start earlier)

-John Barrow (way out of touch with the district and has a very strong primary challenger already. Primary on July 15th!)

John McCain: Beacuse lobbyists should have more power

[ Parent ]
Are you kidding? (0.00 / 0)
it will be the Boren's who will rule the day in an Obama administration. Post-partisanship can only bring triangulation and centricism.

What's funny here is that people in reading Boren's comment don't realize that is one of many 'positioning' to take advantage of Obama's Post-partisanship. You see Obama in his Fox News Sunday appearance opened the door by running from his Liberal votes and his Progressivism. He let it be known that if pressured with the Liberal label he would run from it and adopt Right leaning ideas. So people like Boren are just playing reverse psychology by labeling Obama a Liberal as they know that by calling him that he will turn Right to keep from being labeled a Liberal.

[ Parent ]
ost Partisan wiull mean the center has moved to Obama (4.00 / 1)
and not to Cheney. This is progress by itself. I'm sorry your candidate lost the primary.

Obama's Post Partisan is the left version of FoxNews' "Fair and Balanced Reporting" It is the creation of a mandate for change.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

[ Parent ]
OMG (1.33 / 3)
Did you really write what you did?

Yeah the Republicans are going to move Left with Obama. Sure thing. And the Blue Dogs are going to sit up and beg to move Left!

You live in a fantasy land. Good luck to you.

[ Parent ]
Yes, yes I did. (0.00 / 0)
The Republican Party will not, although some say wrongly that McCain has moved the party left, his attempt to pretend to be further left than Bush is an admission that they will have to, I am saying republicans will. Voters who self identified as republicans, or even still do, see the wisdom in the changes and policies Obama is championing. That is moving left.

Your party of crazy neo-cons, Bushites, Cheneyists, New American Centurians, Abramofs, Frists, Gingrichatollas and Coulterds has had their time, and America has been inoculated to the virus. Viruses mutate and evolve, so the job will be a permanent one, but that is why we have science.

Try again.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

[ Parent ]
My Party? LOL (0.00 / 0)
I have probably been a Liberal longer that you have been on earth I gather from your writing.

"Voters who self identified as republicans, or even still do, see the wisdom in the changes and policies Obama is championing. That is moving left."

Yeah right. If that was so Obama would be getting a 95%+ rating in the polls would he? He be winning every state on the electoral maps. But he is doing none of those things so again you live in a fantasy land. Do you even think about what you write?

"self identified as republicans ...[are]moving Left"?

Very strange.

[ Parent ]
I di not say that Obama had convinced everyone but you and Nader. (0.00 / 0)
I said that the country's center had moved left. and opened up too. What with so many looney nuts being fired from tv and progressive pundits doing so well, even with the conservative media we have people are demanding more analysis from more viewpoints. If 15% of the Republican Vote moved to Obama he would win 56-57% of the final vote in the GE, Thats within the realm of possibility, when we consider that Democratic Party Membership and registration is at an all time high And the Republican brand "is in big trouble" according to a great number of people.

So far Obama's plan to end partisanship by making everyone see the wisdom Democratic Party Ideals is working.

Again if your objective is universal single payer health care, and not just slagging our candidate, please let us know what would be an effective way to organize for it.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

[ Parent ]
Its a correction (0.00 / 0)
"I said that the country's center had moved left. and opened up too."

After moving steadily to the right for the last decade, or so.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
Talk about looney (0.00 / 0)
You said nothing about 'Center' in the post I responded to. You said exactly as I quoted - copied and pasted - from your post. You didn't qualify a number or percentage of Republicans.

Why people like you say one thing and then when called on what they said which is right on the page for all to see - they turn around and say they never said what everyone can read what it is they said and change their story. Now that is looney.

[ Parent ]
This isnt an argument SayItLoud its a diatribe (0.00 / 0)
or "moral majority" or "iwassupportinghillaryreallyiwashonestimnotarepiblican" you arent making points you arent convincing anyone, you arent helping any program, person or policy. All you are doing is ranting to no effect. You might as well be on the street with a placard whose message is written in text to small to see, using up every square inch, in bold magic marker.

Again, as its hard for you to see anything except opportunities to hurl anger, I wasn;t tlking about "all" republicans, nor is Obama, as you know, just enough to make the center move left, the governing majority move left, to acheive sense and balance again, to redress past wrongs, to move the country forward, to form a more perfect union.

What do you want 'majority'? what do you want.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

[ Parent ]
McCain Map (4.00 / 4)
Is that map for real?

"Dem. Primary showed strong Clinton Support in OH & PA"

Which of course can be taken as strong McCain support, right? Are these people high or something? Hillary won PA strongly partly because the "machine" was behind her. Now the "machine" is behind Obama because he's the nominee. How does this help McCain?

I can't speak for Ohio since I don't live there, but I don't understand how they could possibly extrapolate that information from those results.

The graphic reads "changing the map" (4.00 / 5)
And it has Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico listed.

Thoughts:
1. Bush won all those states in 2004.  
2. McCain has been a Senator from Arizona for over 20 years.

I honestly don't know what more to add.  

Saxby Chambliss  

[ Parent ]
If this is seriously how he plans on winning (0.00 / 0)
We are IN.

John McCain.  Wrong for America.
[ Parent ]
Both Nevada and New Mexico (0.00 / 0)
are states in play according to Bower's post from yesterday. both a 'leaners' and could go either way. Are you sure in the face if that you want to stick by your comment?
[ Parent ]
the comment still makes sense.... (4.00 / 1)
McSame wouldn't 'change the map' if he won those states.
[ Parent ]
I do, and without contradicting Chris Bowers (4.00 / 1)
I agree that both NV and NM are in play.  However, when McCain says "changing the map," I understand that to mean him proudly asserting "I can win where other Republicans would lose."

Unless McCain is also proudly asserting "I can lose where George W. Bush won," I absolutely want to stand by that comment.  

Saxby Chambliss  

[ Parent ]
i especially love the CT note (4.00 / 2)
CT within margin of error. Strong association with Sen. Lieberman helps McCain.

uh, yeah. best of luck with that.

It's time:the albany project.

[ Parent ]
Ha, ha! (0.00 / 0)
It made me even more proud of having volunteered for Lamont in '06 to learn that CT today would dump Lieberman in a second.

I hope McCain really does play this up and give CT voters the chance to symbolically do so 4 years early, but this map looks like he's just goofing off instead.

Tim Wolfe

[ Parent ]
Ah (0.00 / 0)
and only Democrats vote in PA and Ohio? How about Republicans and swing voters? How about those White working class that Obama doesn't do so well with? They all vote too and turn out in great numbers. How about a lot of swing Clinton supporters publicly saying they would not vote for Obama? How about those Appalachian areas of both those states?

How about Pennsylvania is a purple state that we didn't win by a wide margin in '04? How about we actually lost Ohio?

So you discount all of that and just attribute winning PA and Ohio with the 'machine'?

[ Parent ]
Im sorry is that supposed to be 'moral' majority? (4.00 / 7)
Is your writing intended to be glorious celebration of your intellectual triumph? You are still right, Obama is not as left as some of us would like. He is also not as Evangelically based as some would like, he is not as feminist as some would like, he is not as military as some would like, he is not as corporate as some would like, he is not as publicly-financed-elections as some would like, he is not as internationalist, not as isolationist, not as arrogant, not as deferential, not as angry, not as republican as some wouyld like. But for all of us, he is enough of what we need, and he is far smarter, far more dignified, far more calm, far more visionary and far more imbued with the potential for rethinking our myriad crises than we hoped.

You can parrot more attacks on our candidate, you can act proud of your disagreement, you can dream of a population, country or alternate reality where your thinking has more purpose, but here in America, here in the democratic party, here in openleft -your posts are not written so as to really serve a purpose.

\

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

[ Parent ]
BTW (4.00 / 1)
In your signature I think you need words "John McCain" hyperlinked and the rest not.  

We won the Battle. Now the Real Fight for Change Begins. Join MoveOn.org and fight for progressive change.  
[ Parent ]
Thanks repairing now. (0.00 / 0)
[ Parent ]
Well that (0.00 / 0)
had a lot to say about PA and Ohio didn't it?
[ Parent ]
The comment was restricted mostly to PA (0.00 / 0)
And it is true that the (Rendell) machine delivered PA to Hillary and will be behind Obama in November.  No way does McCain win PA.  OH looks to go Dem as well, with a Dem Governor and Sec of State this time.  

So you are the new Sayitloud(er)?

John McCain--He's not who you think he is.

[ Parent ]
Oh so you too (0.00 / 0)
think this is still the Primary and the only voters who will vote in the general are the ones Rendell will deliver.

PA is not a purple state that we won by not a big margin in '04? I see.

Yeah mail it in. We will win. Just say it is so and it is so.

[ Parent ]
Here is some polling and analysis (4.00 / 2)
including nice graphics. It is also a link though to more data. lets talk facts, but quietr not "Louder" OK?

Click for www.electoral-vote.com
The first thing you will note is Pennsylvania is blue, as is New Jersey and Ohio is tied. It also shows an Obama win with present polling - 287 to 227 and 20 EV's tied, with 270 needed to win.

Your serve.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

[ Parent ]
I think that might be game (4.00 / 1)
Your serve.

[ Parent ]
I'm thinking about pledgeblue.com, which (4.00 / 6)
provides immediate negative feedback to Dan Boren and Jim Cooper and other dogs of the "Blue" and "Bush" breeds, when they step over the line. Like a rolled-up newspaper to the snout.

This is how it works: Dan Boren says, "Obama is the most liberal senator in Congress and his record does not reflect working in a bipartisan fashion."

This is covered on the blogs, and Pledgeblue sends an email to its list, and 200 DFHs each pledge an average of $50 to the 'Bluer than Boren' account, promising to donate that amount to any more-progressive (not actually progressive, just more) primary opponent that runs against Boren from the left.

Then Boren gets a letter, an email, a phone call, etc., saying: "Due to your comment, 'blah blah blah,' Pledgeblue raised $10,000 in pledges to your as-yet-unnamed primary opponent."

Rinse and repeat. The issue isn't even necessarily winning the primary races. Just keeping the dogs on a leash.  

That's terrific (0.00 / 0)
Now if I can remember, I can recommend this for the weekly prize.

We don't even have to hand over the money if the blue dog straightens out; it's kind of like cosigning for a loan.

And we don't necessarily even have to run someone, let alone win.

The objective is improvement.

[ Parent ]
Exactly! Maybe there'd either be an (0.00 / 0)
'unless you straighten out' clause, or a 'and once we hit $X, we're going to start affirmatively looking for a challenger' thing?

The question is, how do we leverage our (limited) power most effectively?

[ Parent ]
I'm with Joyful- (0.00 / 0)
There could be a tag like recommend, or another choice in the recommend drop down so that this is easy. I heartily recommend the suggestion just as written.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.
[ Parent ]
Nice, but won't work here (0.00 / 0)
For Blue Dogs who are too conservative for their districts (like Boswell, for example) this might work. But Boren is in Oklahoma. No way would he even fear a primary challenge from the left.

In this case I only see two discipliary options:
1) Try to have him tossed from the caucus (or take away whatever chairmanships he has), which would surely not fly as it would draw howls of protest from the other Blue Dogs. Unfortunately Pelosi could not risk having the whole Blue Dog group bolting.

2) Threaten to donate to his Republican opponent. I'm not sure how many progressives would be willing to take this rather extraordinary step. I would definitely consider it, but I can see why others would not. I just look at it as, is one House seat worth having a backstabbing DINO pissing all over your brand, or would you rather just have an actual Republican in that seat?

At a minimum hopefully he gets a good tongue-lashing from Pelosi et al. If he's not going to endorse the party's presidential candidate, at least he could STFU. Certainly I would hope that he would be getting nothing from the DCCC, but odds are he doesn't need it anyway.

[ Parent ]
Well, maybe not 'fear' one ... (4.00 / 1)
He wouldn't fear losing, but I still think he (and others in his position)  really hate the necessity of spending time and money winning a primary that might not otherwise happen. That's just a big headache. And if they can avoid it by shutting up a little ... why not? We need to give him a reason to STFU: to attach a price to spewing garbage.

We're obviously not gonna transform him into Kucinich or something--nor should we. Our goal is to attach a price to trash-talking Democrats, and to try to move conservative Dems not actually into the left, but as far toward the left (or maybe even just the 'center') as they can reasonably go.  

[ Parent ]
Boren comment just weird. (4.00 / 1)
Considering it's widely known his father, the former Oklahoma Senator, endorsed Obama, and it was hinted that Boren the younger wanted to support Obama as well, it comes across as bold-faced positioning and nothing more.  
Weird indeed (0.00 / 0)
First of all, at some point, you have to ask why is this guy a Democrat? Obama represents pretty orthodox party policy, so if that is "too liberal," why is Boren in the party?

Then there's the substance, where he says Obama hasn't shown any willingness to work across the aisle. But just this week I was reading about a government transparency bill he was co-sponsoring with Sen. Coburn (from Oklahoma) and Sen. McCain. Did Boren miss that?

[ Parent ]
Super-inneresting Rick Perlstein review (4.00 / 1)
Just read Rick Perlstein's review of the forthcoming The Liberal Hour: Washington and the Politics of Change in the 1960's, by Calvin Mackenzie and Robert weisbrot. It's in the hard copy of Bookforum and not available online, but here's a sample:

       

"Suburbs,Weisbrot and Mackenzie counter-intuitively argue, were wellsprings of midcentury liberalism.anted better roads, 'Homeowners are stakeholders in a way that renters rarely can be,' they point out. Suburban homeowners w anted better roads, better schools for their children, better playgrounds and parks, and more security. In short, they wanted more government and more programs. And they got them...'

      What's more, they soon generated new sorts of political mandates for their elected officials. 'Now that they could afford new consumer products, they wanted them to be safe. They wanted clean air to breathe and clean water to swim and drink... Only government, they soon learned, could be counted on to meet these needs'"
   


Jim Cooper: (1.60 / 5)
 Matt why not mention that Cooper is Obama's surrogate spokesman on healthcare? Why not mention that he was an advocate for the Insurance Industry and instrumental in defeating Hillary's '90's True Uni-Healthcare? And while you are at it why not mention that he was the architect of the GOP-like Harry and Louise ads attacking Hillary's plan for heathcare in the primaries?

Why just attack Cooper without mentioning that his is Obama's guy on Healthcare issues - and as you point out is now attacking entitlements. Yeah Cooper is Obama's kind of guy and people try to pretend that Obama is Progressive!

And now you have many on the Left questioning Obama's hiring of Jason Furman as an economic adviser. Furman is a Pro-Wall Street kind of a guy who many Obama supporters may try to discount as just another voice to listen to. But when you start seeing 'voices' like his combined with 'voices' like Cooper's who are not bashful about leaning hard to corporate America's side by trying to remove entitlements and holding off Uni-Healthcare it raises big doubts about Obama's intentions.

Kiss off Uni-healthcare under Obama. Should he sit in the Oval Office for 8 years then the mold will be set and we will never see Uni-Healthcare in this country because that will give them time to reshape the conversation and recast a smoke and mirrors healthcare system that does noting to solve the problem or eliminate the gross profits of the industry. Maybe they will even give us tax credits to soften the cost only to take those away down the line like Cooper is trying to do with current entitlements. And have you heard Obama talk out against Cooper? Of course not, he is Obama's guy. Didn't be surprised if we see social programs like Medicare severely cut back in order to hold down corporate taxes under Obama. Remember he already spoke out about social Security and caught some hell from the Left about it. But that was then and this is now.

With advisers like Obama is bringing to the table he is looking like just another DC insider in the making caught up in rubbing elbows with the Corporate Elite and his own financial future in the wake of a Presidency. A man of the people? Talk is cheap. But yet this is the guy who this blog supported.

Just remember: "Blue Dog Jim Cooper [who] wants to overhaul entitlements, ie. cut Social Security and Medicare"...

Is one of Obama's boys.

Try to understand what a coalition is. (0.00 / 0)
Try to put the country ahead of your personal needs. Try to think Roe versus wade, Iraqi deaths, American deaths, Imperial Presidency and the population you seek to lead and serve.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.
[ Parent ]
Try to understand what a coalition is. (0.00 / 0)
Try to put the country ahead of your personal needs. Try to think Roe versus wade, Iraqi deaths, American deaths, Imperial Presidency and the population you seek to lead and serve.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.
[ Parent ]
So what's the solution? (0.00 / 0)
Serious question.  Obama is clearly unacceptable to you, but he's the Democratic nominee.  You're offering lots of complaints here, but what do propose as solutions?
[ Parent ]
What kind of question is that? (1.33 / 3)
You obviously voted for him and don't question the validity of the kind of people he has surrounded himself with so shouldn't it be you who has to come up with the solutions?

My solution to healthcare was Clinton and her all inclusive plan that set a 'marker' for all Americans to be covered. That 'marker' would have blazed the trail to true Uni-healthcare eventually.

Your solution was Obama's Jim Cooper who wants to do away with entitlements.

He is your guy, what are your solutions to his shortfalls?

[ Parent ]
cough (4.00 / 3)
"My solution to healthcare was"

See that is the point of the question.

The issue is tense. You have elsewhere pissed on accountability, you have elsewhere peed on people plooting an electoral win, you have nowhere I can see answered anyone without pouring invective and screed. If yopu are a disappointed Clinton supporter, I undersatand your disappointment in loosing HRc as your champion, we all agree she would have been a formidable opponent and a strong challenger to the forces holding the country in sway.

You solution to that problem appears to be to pour your anger upon those that turened to Obama sooner than most. HRC has asked that you not do that, out of respect for her, and out of respect for the things she is still trying to accomplish.

In this spirit, what are you doing to achieve her wishes? What are doing to achieve her goals? "We must elect Barack Obama" Hillary Clinton proudly and defiantly proclaimed, "as President of the Untied States."

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

[ Parent ]
Assumes facts not in evidence (4.00 / 3)
You're assuming "majority" actually has respect for Clinton, rather than being someone trying to get McCain Online Action Center points for disrupting Democratic discussions.
[ Parent ]
I assume that we agree on that. (0.00 / 0)
His screed is offensive enough to be obvious, but his point, written in another wad of his comment, that Obama can't pull out of Iraq because "Oil will be at $10.00 a gallon...."  That is as silly, and as Republican, and a perfect example of the failed, rejected Republican thinking as Americans have come to despise. It is not, obviously, anything HRC has said.

Because it is so random so filled with bile and anger it is instructive as to unchanged thinking in the Republican camp. I am not sure that his comments should be hidden, my time is not being wasted pointing out his delusions.

I think I'm going to mod his points up enough to keep them from being hidden. Its instructive to all of us and to new visitors too.

If we grow bored with the stink he can be banned.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

[ Parent ]
Many months ago (0.00 / 0)
astute Obama supporters started posting that Obama would have to be held accountable because they knew he was not all that he tried to say he was. There is no question that for many those days may not be too far in the future if he wins. I'm just getting a head start on reminding people of some of the things that Obama will be held accountable for.

Of all the comments here to my posts none really address the issues I bring up because they can't be rebutted. Instead they are the typical Obama supporter personal attack as if that even phases me. It doesn't. I do find it humorous though because while Obama preaches against the tactics of slash and burn and name calling, his supporters continue to practice it with great glee. In other words they don't really practice what he preaches which makes one wonder why they even support him if they can't live his ideals themselves.

As for Clinton, she is doing what she has to do as a Presidential candidate. Endorsing comes with the territory. I'm sure she is at least somewhat, if not fully sincere in her endorsement. But that is her - not me. I drink no ones cool-aide. If I see a flawed candidate I don't stick my head in the sand and pretend they are not flawed. And I believe it is better to call them out now rather than later. That is my right as an American voter. I don't question for a second that if Clinton had won Obama supporters would be doing the same to her.

[ Parent ]
Obama is the nominee (0.00 / 0)
get over it.

John McCain.  Wrong for America.
[ Parent ]
Obama supporters (0.00 / 1)
There is a cult mentality to Obama supporters. They see him not as a political leader but as a Savior who can walk on water. I really worry about their mental health if Obama loses in November. These people have convinced themselves Obama has supernatural powers, that he will win 50 states in November, that evangelicals will vote for him. It is pure delusion.  
[ Parent ]
Unlike me and maybe you, Obama is human and flawed as he admits. (0.00 / 0)
Click for www.electoral-vote.com

This what we expect, based on polling today. He will not walk on water, but clean a great deal of it, and save a lot of it and he might keep it from rising up 9 feet due to global warming.

That will be enough for me.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

[ Parent ]
Please provide evidence of your assertions (4.00 / 1)
I see none anywhere in your post.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
Clintonites (4.00 / 1)
It's odd that these accusations that Obama supporters are a personality cult (and worries about mental health) come from people who are so wrapped up in Hillary Clinton that they refuse to recognize that Obama is the Democratic nominee. Fortunately the vast majority of Clinton supporters are true Democrats and support the Democratic values she believes in so they'll be voting for Obama to promote those values.
[ Parent ]
My solution? (4.00 / 1)
My solution is to put Obama in the White House because he beats the crap out of McCain and, yes, I very much preferred him over Hillary Clinton's more corporate-friendly agenda.  He's obviously far from perfect, but he's the best we've got now.  Plus, he won the freaking nomination.

The other part of my solution is to work my ass off to make sure we get a good, strong progressive caucus in Congress that will stand up strongly to President Obama and ensure that he does the right thing.  He's got some issue he's likely to waver on and will need to be pushed.  This is fine, and to be expected with every candidate.

But nice job pushing the "Obama supporters are cultists", especially coming from an apparent Hillary deadender.  She's moved on and is now supporting Obama, why can't you?

[ Parent ]
upranked because this doesn't really deserve to be hidden (0.00 / 0)
Criticizing obama from the left should be ok
[ Parent ]
This is old time bait and switch .. . (4.00 / 4)
It is a long used electoral/sport/war trick called the feint.

You see it, I assume, in every football game, soccer game, basketball game and even good baseball games. It helped defeat Napoleon, and threatened allied forces in WW11 Europe.

Make your opponent think you are moving down court, and then twist up, set your stick to put puck into the net left of the goalie but shoot right to Crosbie who plants it in the five hole. Navratilova pull s her racket back for a smash to court left, and thenm the sneaky gal lobs it into center near net.

"Having seen McCain's map I insist we spend all our money defending California, we were warned in time!"

Luckily, this is the Obama Map


Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.

Well... (4.00 / 2)
I hope Obama isn't putting resources into AS, GU, PR, and VI. Unless he's as uninformed as Mark Penn, I'm sure he realizes that they have no electoral votes.
[ Parent ]
lol --- Obama's methods are mysterious indeed (4.00 / 1)
I support statehood for all. What America needs is not fewer immigrants but bigger borders.
lol
sorry for the map error.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.
[ Parent ]
California? Really?... REALLY??? (0.00 / 0)
Dude, Reagan carried it because he was from here.
McCain is liked her (for some reason), but not that much, and not even close to as much as Obama.

Not. a. chance.

California (4.00 / 4)
As a long-time resident and political junkie, let me say:

Memo to John McCain:  You are really well liked and respected here in California.  Those recent polls are wrong.  Reagan and Nixon both carried California.  You can too!!  And the Gov is a really popular guy!  Come here often.  Buy lots of ads.  You can do it!  

I laughed out loud when the McCain folks said that NP voters in California (0.00 / 0)
were a group McCain could tap.  I'm registered non-partisan and I know a lot of very liberal folks are too.  There's no way that McCain's going to pick up the "independent" vote in California.
California (0.00 / 0)
Not sure about California but McCain has a good shot at winning New Jersey.

Based on talks with family and friends there, all Dems, they are voting for McCain.

Dont worry - Obama has moved well ahead in New Jersey. (4.00 / 1)
[ Parent ]
Rasmussen? (0.00 / 0)
You gotta be kidding. This is June and Obama has yet to be subjected to any scrutiny much less become a target of the Right Wing Noise Machine. He is still in honeymoon phase.  
[ Parent ]
Well I agree, your evidence is much more convincing. (4.00 / 5)
relativesandfriendsitalktoonthephoneasincehrcendorsed.com is cited a lot lately but there is some talk that they are a republican front, so you might want to be careful.

Change
"We must break up the banks and never again let them get so big that they distort our politics and take down the economy.
[ Parent ]
You gotta be kidding (4.00 / 1)
"Based on talks with family and friends there, all Dems, they are voting for McCain."

Do your family and friends comprise a statistically relevant population of NJ Democrats?


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
Opening the Day: McCain Campaign's Map to Victory Includes... California? | 99 comments
Donate to Open Left







QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox