2008 Primaries Thread 2: THE QUICKENING

xp: or COS!

Obama was pretty chill and "let's move on" about it at the debate that next day, def. not on the attack

TS: Obama/Ruckus 08 v. Obama/Cosby 08

I think the reason for the first ambiguous denial was not that the Clinton camp was hiding some involvement in the photos - I think it's more likely they got a bit too clever thinking they could turn the issue around and make it look like the Obama camp was somehow dissing Kenyan native dress. Kind of a stupid idea perhaps, but not necessarily a sign of complicity.

Cosby/Ruckus 08

o nate all of their denials were ambiguous

How so? The top campaign brass claimed they knew nothing about it. How's that ambiguous? Either they knew about it or they didn't.

o. natepaws

What else could they say? The only way that they could say for a fact that no one associated with the campaign sent it was if they knew who did send it. It's not like they monitor all the email accounts of everyone who works for the campaign.

i think, o. nate, that both campaigns were intelligent enough to realize it was a stupid flap over a non-incriminating photo of a non-incident, and were ready to let it rest (or head to the blog universe for dissection and paranoid discussion)

Re: Obama "really can't win the General Election" -- Downticket Democrats believe Obama's coattails are longer than HRC's. Not a direct response, per se, but still good evidence.

What else could they say?

"This is an obvious attempt to rankle ethnic prejudice against Senator Obama and we denounce any such divisive smears." Too straightforward?

yeah, if you want health care, maybe you should pick the candidate more likely to help us get over the filibuster hump

"we'll take a look see if this came from our shop - if it did those responsible will be dealt with"

This, however, is a direct response to Penn's comment.

"we dont know nothin - it took us all morning to come up w/that - care to try and prove it wrong - you cant right? ok now whats no bad abt obama in his native garb lol"

"Watching the Democrats self-immolate during this election, which should have been a slam-dunk for the party, has really made me question its abiity to lead this country at all, ever again. If someone, anyone, could explain to me how this party is fit to lead, please, let them explain. From its ineffectual performance in Congress since the midterms to its fratricidal primary warfare, the Dem party seems determined to prove that it has outlived its usefulness. Now, gifted with a candidate who represents a new start for the future--who offers an attempt to show the country how we can at least attempt to transcend the most divisive elements of racism, prejudice and partisanship (no, not get rid of them completely, but at least kick them a ways to the curb in the name of progress and solving this country's very serious current challenges), it has instead chosen a fight to the death to re-install a desperate, discredited monarchy that is taking refuge in the last century's cultural and identity wars.

What the hell?

And where is the party's leadership? Cowering in the shadows. Unlike the Republicans, who are at least attempting to unite around their candidate and present a grown-up face--and whose candidates were Emily Posts compared to the Clintons in their effort to maintain some of the party's dignity during the primaries--too many Dem leaders are standing around watching this ridiculous spectacle hands in pockets.

Gore? Edwards? Biden? Richardson? If they really backed the Clintons they'd have said so by now, but rather than come out and stand up for the future, they're hedging their bets. Hoping for Cabinet posts? The Republican drop outs, meanwhile, immediately moved to unity, endorsing McCain quickly.

Dems will say this is healthy. Democracy is messy! Oh, please. Maybe it WAS healthy. Now it's just nuts. No offense to the Palestinians, but you know that saying that "they never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity?" Well, the Dems have become the Palestinians of U.S. politics.

This election will signal the end of my identification as a Democrat. I've had it. And I can't imagine I'm alone in thinking and feeling this way. Can't the party see this?"

Yeah, cited upthread, hoos.

xpost
Also, I think it's a bit chicken-little-ish - there are many structural reasons why the GOP and Dem primaries have turned out differently, and I don't think it's quite as apocalyptic for the Dems as that post makes it sound.

I agree that Democrats should distance themselves from identity politics since the way they're going about it is inherently divisive both internally and externally but that excerpt basically reads like "WAAAAAH I WANNA BE A BORG" to me.

^^ i agree. democrats could stand to stop worrying about the monsters under the bed. xpost

It's also trivializing otherwise heavyweight Democratic contenders. The race is degenerating into "So-and-so is a racist," "So-and-so is a sexist," "It's wrong to play the race card and call me a racist," and "It's wrong to play the gender card and call me a sexist."

More debates! Mark your calendars. April 16th on ABC and April 19th on CBS, Pennsylvania and North Carolina respectively.

It's also trivializing otherwise heavyweight Democratic contenders. The race is degenerating into "So-and-so is a racist," "So-and-so is a sexist," "It's wrong to play the race card and call me a racist," and "It's wrong to play the gender card and call me a sexist."

-- Daniel, Esq., Thursday, March 13, 2008 4:12 PM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

both race and gender cards were played by hillary

I do not deny it.

not that the gender 'card' didnt have some truth to it, just saying

Mark your calendars.

NO

I'll watch the ABC one if Charlie Gibson does it again. I'm not terribly interested in watching Katie Couric do the one on CBS, though, if that's the case.

The race has also devolved into "denounce" and "fire".

Let's give Kurt Loder a debate.

A friend sent HRC's interview this morning with NPR's Steve Inskeep. "She's a very convincing liar," she wrote.

http://cache.opt.fimserve.com/contents/772/38/38772/Tshirt_retrobama_sd_728x90.gif

DECISION 2008

snarrrrrrky.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/news/2008/03/obama_campaign_skewers_clinton.html

this makes them look awful, why would they send out something like this?

I don't think it makes them look bad at all - the more they harp on the fact that Obama's won more delegates, more states, and more votes the less traction Hillary's non-stop re-framing effort looks like the pathetic narcissism that it is.

I don't think it makes them look bad at all - the more they harp on the fact that Obama's won more delegates, more states, and more votes the less traction more Hillary's non-stop re-framing effort looks like the pathetic narcissism that it is.

the other thing is a memo like this isn't exactly aiming at 'the people' - its aiming at journalists/people who are framing this argument. if you think the people voting in PA are avidly reading press releases linked on thepage you're kidding yrself.

Matt Bai's executive summary of candidate demos with nice graph

I don't know, personally I think sending out emails to the press that read like dailykos comments isn't a good look, but maybe voters won't feel the same way. wasn't obama supposed to civil and inclusive or something?

xxpost yeah there are different audiences but I can't believe it's possible to send out something this obnoxious and petty and simultaneously present yourself as an inspiring voice of change.

uh, people are moody

I think this is a great example of the generational divide between the two campaigns. This is the off the cuff, casual, twitter style commentary that is the main mode of communication in "Web 2.0" It seems like one of my friends could have written it!

Sent by Patrick

^^ this is the first thing i thought of while reading this

(except i thought it in a considerably less herb-ish tone)

also in my head i did not say 'web 2.0' or 'twitter-style'

HOOS you have a 'zing me' sticker on your back

Great response email by Obama. There's snark in it, but not the kind that will justify HRC getting indignant about it. And, after all, her campaign's initial email was hard-hitting and snide toward / dismissive of Obama's campaign.

Fight fire with fire.

I can't believe it's possible to send out something this obnoxious and petty and simultaneously present yourself as an inspiring voice of change.

Except that humor plays well than anger. It implies that he's ahead, that he's comfortable, and in charge. It also helps put the lie to her spin that she's got more experience; if they can counter her manipulations without looking too frustrated, HRC will be the one looking desperate.

Shakey, basically OTM

This is the off the cuff, casual, twitter style commentary that is the main mode of communication in "Web 2.0" It seems like one of my friends could have written it!

Yeah exactly. Is America really ready for a president who tweets?

even over Clinton

LOL

Anyway--I'm not really saying this is going to hurt his campaign in a significant way, just that it's absolutely painful to read.

get that checked out

Except that humor plays well than anger.

It's not really humor tho, just that exaggeratedly sarcastic "LOL yr argument is so stupid it's just funny to me!!!" tone that people adopt in message board arguments to hide their keyboard-destroying rage.

HOOS you have a 'zing me' sticker on your back

-- deej, Thursday, March 13, 2008 10:13 PM

yeah hence the 'distance myself' followup

where my surrogates at