Official Campaign 2008 Hot Stove Thread - Page 12 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-19-2007, 09:24 AM   #166
Rock n' Roll Doggie
CTU2fan's Avatar
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,366
Local Time: 01:26 PM
Let's hope McCain gets the Republican nom, no way is a pro-war, pro-life candidate winning.

I think it's sad that I'm resorted to hoping the Dems nominate a conservative candidate, just so they can win...

Oh and I liked Howard Dean, even if the media had a lot of fun mocking the guy.

CTU2fan is offline  
Old 02-19-2007, 09:45 AM   #167
Blue Crack Addict
phanan's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: in the darkness on the edge of town
Posts: 24,906
Local Time: 01:26 PM
I like how Romney just joined the NRA back in August, after previously supporting more gun control and banning some assault weapons.

Talk about a waffler - this guy is the John Kerry of 2008. Must be a Massachusetts thing.

phanan is offline  
Old 02-19-2007, 12:04 PM   #168
Blue Crack Addict
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,837
Local Time: 01:26 PM
Originally posted by phanan
I like how Romney just joined the NRA back in August, after previously supporting more gun control and banning some assault weapons.
He thought NRA stood for "Not Really an Asshole"

Not Really Arrogant?
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 02-19-2007, 01:04 PM   #169
Blue Crack Addict
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,837
Local Time: 01:26 PM
Editor and Publisher

A new Gallup survey finds that, despite all the favorable attention gained by former Vice President Al Gore in the past year surrounding his Oscar-nominated global warming film, support among voters remains "lukewarm."

His favorable and unfavorable rating have changed little over the past five years.

"An analysis of recent Gallup Poll data shows little significant change in Gore's standing with the American public despite his recent high visibility," Gallup relates. "His favorable ratings are roughly the same as they have been over the last five years, and remain relatively lukewarm. Although he is tied for third place among Democrats as their favored nominee for the 2008 presidential election, his position is now only slightly higher than it has been in recent months."

Gore's currently pulls 52% favorable and 45% unfavorable ratngs. His favorable rating is not significantly different from measurements in 2003 and late 2002. Gore's unfavorable rating has not changed at all over this time period.

Gore trails Sen. Hillary Clinton badly as a favorite of Democratic voters, at 40% to 14%. Sen. Barack Obama draws 21% and Gore edges out former Sen. John Edwards at 13%.

The poll of 1,006 voters was taken Feb. 9-11.
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 02-19-2007, 01:26 PM   #170
Rock n' Roll Doggie
BonosSaint's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 3,566
Local Time: 01:26 PM
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen

He thought NRA stood for "Not Really an Asshole"

Not Really Arrogant?

BonosSaint is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 09:33 AM   #171
Blue Crack Addict
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,837
Local Time: 01:26 PM
So what does everyone think of this situation? Wow, it's starting already.

February 22, 2007
NY Times

The sun was not yet up yesterday, and members of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign team were confronted with the kind of attack that most infuriates them: one questioning the character of Mrs. Clinton and her husband.

To make matters worse, it came from David Geffen, the Hollywood executive who was once a big supporter of the Clintons but has since turned on them and is now backing Senator Barack Obama for the Democratic presidential nomination.

What followed was a remarkably caustic exchange between the Clinton and Obama campaigns that highlighted the sensitivity in the Clinton camp to Mr. Obama’s rapid rise as a rival and his positioning as a fresh face unburdened by the baggage borne by Mrs. Clinton, the junior senator from New York. The Clinton camp seemed also to be sending a warning to mudslinging critics that they would be dealt with fiercely.

It began with a column in The New York Times by Maureen Dowd, in which Mr. Geffen said the Clintons lie “with such ease, it’s troubling” and that the Clinton political operation “is going to be very unpleasant and unattractive and effective.” Mr. Geffen called Mr. Clinton a “reckless guy” who had not changed in the last six years, and suggested that Mrs. Clinton was too scripted.

In a statement it fired off at 9:46 a.m., the Clinton campaign called on Mr. Obama to sever his ties to Mr. Geffen and return the portion of the $1.3 million that Mr. Geffen helped raise on Tuesday at a reception in Beverly Hills.

“While Senator Obama was denouncing slash-and-burn politics yesterday, his campaign’s finance chair was viciously and personally attacking Senator Clinton and her husband,” Howard Wolfson, the Clinton campaign communications director, said in a statement.

Bill Burton, a spokesman for Mr. Obama, responded with a statement less than an hour and a half later, saying it was “ironic that the Clintons had no problem with David Geffen” when he was “raising them $18 million and sleeping at their invitation in the Lincoln Bedroom.”

The punch and counterpunch went on all day, transfixing the political world and overshadowing a gathering of all the Democratic candidates except Mr. Obama, the junior Illinois senator, at a union-sponsored forum in Nevada at which Mrs. Clinton faced criticism from some opponents about her Iraq stance.

The Democrats were not the only ones dealing with intramural warfare. On the Republican side, Vice President Dick Cheney struck back at criticism leveled against him and former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld by Senator John McCain of Arizona, underscoring the often tense relationship between the White House and Mr. McCain.

The presidential campaign has been a relatively polite affair in its early stages, and the day marked an abrupt change of tone that exposed the intensity of the bad feeling bubbling just below the surface in both parties. None of the players showed much inclination to back off.

In an interview with ABC News in which Mr. Cheney was asked about Mr. McCain’s criticism of Mr. Rumsfeld, the vice president responded by bringing up other McCain comments critical of Mr. Cheney’s role in managing the war in Iraq, and said Mr. McCain had subsequently said he was sorry.

“John said some nasty things about me the other day,” Mr. Cheney added, “and then the next time he saw me, ran over to me and apologized. Maybe he’ll apologize to Rumsfeld.”

In response, Mr. McCain seemed to go out of his way to re-emphasize his assertion that Mr. Rumsfeld would be remembered as one of the worst defense secretaries in history, and to criticize the Bush administration more generally when he appeared at a news conference in Los Angeles to discuss initiatives to deal with global warming.

When asked about the administration’s environmental record, Mr. McCain said, “I would assess this administration’s record on global warming as terrible.”

Asked by a reporter about his comments about Mr. Rumsfeld, Mr. McCain said, “The criticism of the conduct of the war I have voiced for more than three years when I saw that this train wreck was taking place.”

Some minutes later, after the news conference had ended, Mr. McCain, unbidden, said to the reporter, “Sir, I stand by my comments about Secretary Rumsfeld, by the way.”

Similarly, Mr. Geffen affirmed his view of the Clintons, saying he had been quoted accurately and that Mr. Wolfson was wrong in calling him the finance chairman of the Obama campaign (he said he had no formal role in the campaign).

Mrs. Clinton, asked Wednesday afternoon if Mr. Obama should denounce the Geffen remarks, declined to join in the hand-to-hand combat, but expressed general disapproval with the remarks while also defending her husband, which drew huge cheers from the audience of union members she was addressing.

“I want to run a very positive campaign, and I sure don’t want Democrats or the supporters of Democrats to be engaging in the politics of personal destruction,” she said at the forum of Democratic presidential candidates in Carson City, Nev. “I think we should stay focused on what we’re going to do for America. And, you know, I believe Bill Clinton was a good president, and I’m very proud of the record of his two terms.”

When pressed, she said she would leave it up to the Obama campaign to make its decision on Mr. Geffen, then noted that she was “excited” to be in Nevada “with the other candidates who came,” a comment that only drew attention to Mr. Obama’s choice to skip the event.

The Geffen remarks bubbled up throughout the forum. One candidate, Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico, said Mr. Obama should denounce Mr. Geffen’s remarks. “If we’re going to win, we have to be positive,” Mr. Richardson said. “I think these name-callings are not good.”

As he arrived in Iowa late yesterday afternoon, Mr. Obama was met with questions from reporters about the clash.

“It’s not clear to me why I would be apologizing for someone else’s remarks,” Mr. Obama said. “My sense is that Mr. Geffen may have differences with the Clintons, but that doesn’t really have anything to do with our campaign.”

When asked whether he was proud of Mr. Geffen’s support, the senator declared: “He hosted an event for me yesterday. Absolutely.”

Obama advisers described the Geffen remarks as an insignificant blip and said they saw no political danger in letting them stand. While some supporters of Mrs. Clinton said they were worried that the campaign had lost its cool over Mr. Geffen, several Clinton advisers insisted that they were not overreacting.

One adviser, who is not part of Mrs. Clinton’s day-to-day inner circle but speaks to her regularly about politics and fund-raising, said Mr. Geffen’s comments might not shock “political insiders” in Washington or New York who are used to hearing bad things about the Clintons. But such criticism, especially from a former Clinton supporter like Mr. Geffen, could surprise and concern average voters in Iowa, New Hampshire and in other politically important states where they are starting to form impressions of Mrs. Clinton as a presidential candidate.

Other advisers said the Clinton camp was simply frustrated that Mr. Obama had received glowing media coverage, and was eager to call out his campaign for hypocrisy by contrasting the Geffen remarks with Mr. Obama’s pledge to be positive.

“Obama has gotten under the campaign’s skin for weeks now — especially his free ride in the media —and Hillary’s people were just waiting for their first chance to attack his image as Mr. Positive,” said one Clinton adviser who is not part of the day-to-day political operation.
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 02-22-2007, 09:38 AM   #172
Blue Crack Distributor
LarryMullen's POPAngel's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: I'll be up with the sun, I'm not coming down...
Posts: 53,698
Local Time: 12:26 PM
We knew it was going to happen sooner or later. I'm not shocked in the slightest.
LarryMullen's POPAngel is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 09:10 AM   #173
Blue Crack Addict
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,837
Local Time: 01:26 PM
Would-Be Trouble for a Candidate
Older, Twice-Divorced Smoker Wouldn't Play Well With Voters

Feb. 27, 2007 — - The best news for the 2008 presidential candidates is that none of them is a 72-year-old twice-divorced cigarette smoker. But even by itself, each one of those attributes is a significant potential pitfall in the coming campaign.

Being a Mormon is a hurdle as well, while this ABC News/Washington Post poll finds that two other widely noted attributes of current candidates -- being a woman and being an African-American -- have no net negative impact on voter preferences.

Among all these, age stands out. Fifty-eight percent of Americans say they'd be less likely to vote for a candidate who's over 72; just 3 percent would be more apt to back someone that age. John McCain turns 72 in August 2008, three years older than Ronald Reagan was when he was first elected president in November 1980.

Next on the list are being a Mormon (as is former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney), with 29 percent less likely to vote for one; being twice-divorced (Rudy Giuliani), with 26 percent calling that an impediment; and being a smoker (Barack Obama is trying to quit), a negative for 21 percent.

By contrast, as many people say they'd be more likely as less likely to vote for either a woman or an African-American candidate, giving those attributes no negative impact.

The extent to which any of these attributes ultimately hurts a candidate remains to be seen. The chief reason is that politics is comparative; voters don't assess each candidate in a vacuum but in comparison to his or her opponents. It's hard, for example, to imagine that many voters who strongly support Giuliani on the issues would fail to back him solely on the basis of his repeat trips to the altar.

A good candidate, moreover, can defuse negatives. In a debate on Oct. 21, 1984, during his re-election campaign, Reagan famously countered questions about his age by quipping that he wouldn't make Democrat Walter Mondale's "youth and inexperience" an issue in the campaign. (Reagan was 73 at the time; Mondale, a former vice president, 56.)

Similarly -- in the face of polls in which 21 percent said they wouldn't vote for a Catholic -- John F. Kennedy addressed his religion in a celebrated speech at the Rice Hotel in Houston on Sept. 12, 1960: "I am not the Catholic candidate for president. I am the Democratic Party's candidate for president who happens also to be a Catholic. I do not speak for my church on public matters -- and the church does not speak for me."

Still, personal attributes can matter. Kennedy was elected in 1960 by the narrowest popular vote margin in U.S. history. In 1980, 12 percent of voters called Reagan's age "very important" in their decision, and three-quarters of them voted for Jimmy Carter. That race wasn't close enough for those votes to make a difference, but in another contest it might -- particularly in a primary in which personal attributes can matter more because the candidates tend to have more common ground on the issues. Mormon -- A positive sign for Romney is that objections to voting for a Mormon have eased a bit -- from 35 percent "less likely" in December to 29 percent now. At the same time, these views may be hard for him to address entirely, because they're strongly held, and cut to personal religious beliefs.

In a follow-up question, among those who said they'd be less likely to vote for a Mormon, six in 10 said there's "no chance" they'd do so -- the equivalent of 18 percent of Americans saying they wouldn't vote for Romney solely because of his religion.

Reluctance to vote for a Mormon is broadly based, albeit highest among young adults and evangelical white Protestants. When asked, in an open-ended question, their reasons, most said they disagree with the Mormon religion, are unfamiliar with it, or -- in an echo of the Kennedy objections -- worry about influence of the church in politics.

Divorce, Smoking, Age -- Compunctions about voting for a 72-year-old, a smoker or a twice-divorced candidate also are broadly based. Concern about a twice-divorced candidate is higher among conservative Republicans, all Republicans and churchgoing white Protestants -- potential problems for Giuliani in a tight primary.

With a smoker, objections are highest among better-educated adults, Westerners and Republicans. And objections to an older candidate are somewhat higher among women than men (as well as among Giuliani supporters vs. McCain supporters).

Sex and Race -- Being a woman or an African-American, as noted, are as much an attraction as an impediment. In particular, 27 percent of blacks say they'd be more likely to vote for a black candidate, as do 19 percent of liberal Democrats and 17 percent of young adults. A woman candidate is most attractive to young women (37 percent of women under 30 say they're more likely to support a woman); blacks; liberal Democrats; young adults of any sex; and women of any age, particularly Democratic women.

Reluctance to vote for a black candidate peaks (at 13 percent) among Republican men; concerns about a woman candidate are highest among conservatives, Republicans and evangelical white Protestants.

As with people less likely to support a Mormon, this poll asked those less likely to support a woman why they felt that way. Most either say they didn't think a woman could do the job, or a man could do it better; among the rest, 15 percent specifically said they don't like Hillary Clinton.

Methodology -- This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by telephone Feb. 22-25, 2007, among a random national sample 1,082 adults, including an oversample of black respondents. The results have a three-point error margin. Sampling, data collection and tabulation by TNS of Horsham, Pa.

ABC News polls can be found at at
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 02-27-2007, 09:30 AM   #174
Blue Crack Addict
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,837
Local Time: 01:26 PM

I have to say the intelligence thing is a riot (though to say you're more intelligent than Bush really isn't saying all that much ). And the hair thing..soon Mitt will be sporting bedhead. I've always had a lil fantasy of reaching out and messing up his hair-but not in bed, that's for sure...

Document shows Romney's strategies
Plan addresses faith, rivals, shift on issues

By Scott Helman, Boston Globe Staff | February 27, 2007

Here are some views of Mitt Romney causing concern inside his campaign: His hair looks too perfect, he's not a tough war time leader, and he has earned a reputation as "Slick Dancing Mitt" or "Flip-Flop Mitt."

Romney and his advisers have identified those perceptions as threats to his bid for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination, according to an exhaustive internal campaign document obtained by the Globe.

The 77-slide PowerPoint presentation offers a revealing look at Romney's pursuit of the White House, outlining a plan for branding himself, framing his competitors, and allaying voter concerns about his record, his Mormon faith, and his shifts on key issues like abortion.

Dated Dec. 11, the blueprint is wide-ranging and analyzes in detail the strengths and weaknesses of Romney and his two main Republican rivals, Senator John McCain of Arizona and Rudolph W. Giuliani, former mayor of New York. The plan, which top Romney strategist Alex Castellanos helped to draft, charts a course for Romney to emerge as the nominee, but acknowledges that the "electorate is not where it needs to be for us to succeed."

It is unclear how the campaign is using the document. However, its expansiveness, level of detail and the involvement of Castellanos suggest that it is a significant strategic blueprint. On the campaign trail, Romney is sounding some of the themes outlined in it.

Romney spokesman Kevin Madden would not confirm or deny the plan's authenticity, saying only that the former governor has received an "overly abundant" amount of input on how to run his campaign. Asked specifically about the contents, Madden said: "If anything, it's a compilation of political conventional wisdom."

"We're obviously very, very focused on introducing Mitt Romney and his vision for leading the country into the future," Madden said. "And everybody recognizes that he's somebody with a lot of energy and a lot of ideas."

Campaign blueprints analyzing a candidate and the competition are not unusual; earlier this year, the New York Daily News obtained and wrote about a similar dossier from Giuliani's campaign. And the Romney presentation lacks any big bombshells. Still, it provides a window into the challenges and opportunities Romney and his advisors envision as he tries to win the Republican primary.

The plan, for instance, indicates that Romney will define himself in part by focusing on and highlighting enemies and adversaries, such common political targets as "jihadism," the "Washington establishment," and taxes, but also Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, "European-style socialism," and, specifically, France. Even Massachusetts, where Romney has lived for almost 40 years, is listed as one of those "bogeymen," alongside liberalism and Hollywood values.

Indeed, a page titled "Primal Code for Brand Romney" said that Romney should define himself as a foil to Bay State Democrats such as Senators Edward M. Kennedy and John Kerry and former governor Michael Dukakis. Romney should position himself as "the anti-Kerry," the presentation says. But elsewhere in the plan, it's clear that Romney and his aides are aware he's open to the same charge that helped derail Kerry's presidential campaign in 2004: that he is a flip-flopper who has changed positions out of political expediency.

Because he is attempting to capture the conservative vote, Romney is facing persistent questions about his relatively recent shifts to more conservative positions on issues such as abortion, gay rights, and gun control. One page of the plan cites Kerry and says Romney doesn't want to spend 2007 facing skepticism about his conservative message.

The blueprint also describes political assets and vulnerabilities of McCain and Giuliani, who lead Romney in the polls.

McCain is described as a war hero and maverick with a compelling narrative and a reputation for wit, authenticity, and straight talk. But he's also seen as "too Washington," "too close to [Democratic] Left," an "uncertain, erratic, unreliable leader in uncertain times." "Does he fit The Big Chair?" the document asks. The plan calls McCain, 70, a "mature brand" and raises questions about whether he could handle the rigors of leading the free world.

Giuliani is called an outside-the-Beltway rock star and truth teller who earned the nation's trust for his leadership of New York City's response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. But he is described as a one-dimensional Lone Ranger whose social views -- he supports abortion rights and civil unions for gay couples -- could destroy the "GOP brand." "We can't disqualify Dems like Hillary on social issues ever again" if Giuliani is the nominee, the document states.

The plan also touches on what it calls Giuliani's ethical issues, including his relationship with Bernard Kerik , former New York police commissioner who withdrew from consideration to become US homeland security secretary amid allegations of improprieties. It raises Giuliani's "personal political liabilities," an apparent reference to his three marriages and bitter public divorce from his second wife, Donna Hanover.

It is clear that Romney's campaign operatives plan to make sure that voters are familiar with the perceived weaknesses of McCain and Giuliani and conduct opposition research on the candidates. But the campaign, according to the blueprint, also wants to avoid attacking either man too directly or harshly, in part because Romney wants their supporters to ultimately shift to him. At a campaign stop in New Hampshire last week, he called McCain and Giuliani friends and national heroes.

The plan concedes that, with McCain and Giuliani in the race, Romney is unlikely to be the top pick for those voters looking for a "war/strong leader." His goal appears to be establishing himself as a credible second choice for those voters, but the first pick for voters looking for an energetic, optimistic, and innovative chief executive. (A page titled "Own the future" dubs McCain the past, Giuliani the present, and Romney the future. )

The case for Romney, according to the plan, is this: "Mitt Romney, tested, intelligent, get-it-done, turnaround CEO Governor and strong leader from outside Washington, is a better candidate than McCain & Giuliani to ensure that America's strength is maintained so we can meet a new generation of global challenges."

The document underscores Romney's aim to become the "only electable choice" for socially conservative voters. But the plan anticipates that Romney could face a serious threat if Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker who is considered one of the GOP's leading conservative intellectuals, decides to enter the race.

Romney's sensitivity to his Mormon faith as a campaign issue is apparent throughout the plan.

It acknowledges that some view Mormonism as weird and lists ways Romney should defend his faith, from highlighting the way he has lived his life, rather than which church he attends, to acknowledging theological differences with mainline Christian denominations while refusing to be drawn into an extensive discussion of Mormon doctrine and practices. It also suggests Romney might soon need to address the issue head-on, perhaps as John F. Kennedy did in a 1960 speech amid concerns about his relationship to the Catholic Church.

The document appears to raise the possibility of Romney delivering such an address at George H.W. Bush's presidential library outside Houston, the same city where Kennedy gave his.

Enmity toward France, where Romney did his Mormon mission during college, is a recurring theme of the document. The European Union, it says at one point, wants to "drag America down to Europe's standards," adding: "That's where Hillary and Dems would take us. Hillary = France." The plan even envisions "First, not France" bumper stickers.

In addition, the document provides a Romney roadmap for the early primaries, suggesting that he hopes to emerge as a credible "alternative to frontrunner" in Iowa, win New Hampshire, show strength in South Carolina, and be dominant in states, such as Michigan, that are eyeing early primary dates. The plan suggests Romney make full use of new media to reach voters, from feeding videos to YouTube to perhaps creating his own radio programming.

Like every Republican in the race, Romney faces the delicate task of how to talk about President Bush, whom the country gives low job-approval ratings .

But the plan lists two ways Romney can set himself apart from Bush. The first says, simply, "Intelligence."
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 06:44 PM   #175
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 11:26 AM
For what it's worth...

WASHINGTON (March 4) - Mitt Romney won the most support for the Republican presidential nomination in a straw poll of GOP activists attending an annual conference.
Despite his record of inconsistency on some social issues, the former Massachusetts governor got 21 percent of the 1,705 votes cast by paid registrants to the three-day Conservative Political Action Conference. They were asked who their first choice would be for the Republican nomination.

Rudy Giuliani , the former New York City mayor whose moderate stances on social issues irks the party's right wing, was second with 17 percent.

Sen. John McCain , R-Ariz., who rounds out the top tier of serious GOP contenders, skipped the event -- and was punished for it. He got only 12 percent of the vote.

Ahead of him were Romney, Giuliani and two others. Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas, a favorite of religious conservatives, got 15 percent, while former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia, who says he won't decide whether to run until the fall, got 14 percent.

Others got 5 percent or less.
INDY500 is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 09:29 PM   #176
Forum Moderator
yolland's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 06:26 PM
I'm sure they're all over the web anyhow but there's a couple nice pics accompanying the article.

Obama and Clinton Mark Civil Rights Struggle

New York Times, March 4, 2007

SELMA — Evoking the passions and rivalries of the civil rights era, Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton made deeply personal appeals to voters in the sanctuaries of black churches here today and then joined former President Bill Clinton for a march across a bridge where white police beat black Alabamans nearly 42 years ago.

It was an extraordinary sight: The Clintons and Mr. Obama, competitors for the Democratic presidential nomination, locking arms — with two black congressman in between them — and walking down Martin Luther King Jr. Street to commemorate the footsteps of black demonstrators who were met with violence as they tried to march to Montgomery to demand civil rights in 1965. The visit to Selma, a historically rich, economically struggling city, became a proxy battle for black support between Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama, whose historic candidacy represents a threat to Mrs. Clinton’s traditional base. That competitive dynamic intensified today with the debut of Mr. Clinton on the campaign trail, six weeks into his wife’s bid, and among a bloc of voters who are at once devoted to the former president and torn between his wife and Mr. Obama.

It was the first side-by-side appearance of Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton in their 2008 presidential campaign, and the political theater of the two campaigns overlapped repeatedly, but with a polite tone that contrasted with their political skirmishing of recent weeks. Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton spoke at services along the same street, three blocks apart, and the lines of worshippers were so long that they nearly intermingled. Both candidates paid homage to the same civil rights leaders, and both concluded the services by locking arms with worshippers and swaying to “We Shall Overcome.”

At different points, both Clintons said the Voting Rights Act of 1965 had paved the way for Mr. Obama to run for president. (Mrs. Clinton said she had benefited from the law, too.) “Today, it is giving Senator Obama the chance to run for president,” Mrs. Clinton told worshippers at the First Baptist Church, to enthusiastic applause. “And by its logic and spirit, it is giving the same chance to Gov. Bill Richardson to run as a Hispanic. And, yes, it is giving me that chance.”

And Mr. Obama, before the commemoration march, praised both Clintons and said of the political campaign under way, “We don’t have time for other folks to divide us.”

Mr. Clinton, arguably the most cadence-blessed speaker of the three, half-joked this afternoon that he had been bested by the other two. “All the good speaking has been done by Hillary and Senator Obama already — I’m just sort of bringing up the rear,” he said.
In a 35-minute address, interrupted repeatedly by applause and shouts of praise from worshippers, Mr. Obama said it was time for his generation to pick up the work of those who have toiled before. He said it was time for the current generation to urge family and friends to shake their apathy to engage in politics and action. “I know if cousin Pookie would vote, if brother Jethro would get off the couch and stop watching Sportscenter and go register some people and get them to the polls, we’d have a different kind of politics,” Mr. Obama said, the crowd rising to its feet. “Kick off your bedroom slippers, put on your marching shoes!”

Down the street, meanwhile, the congregation warmly welcomed Mrs. Clinton, who blended personal anecdotes with a fluidly thematic set of remarks, in which she said the civil rights march “is not over yet...We’ve got to stay awake, we’ve got to stay awake because we have a march to finish,” Mrs. Clinton said, “a march towards one America.” Her voice rising, she said: “Poverty and growing inequality matter. Health care matters! The people of the Gulf Coast matter! Our soldiers matter! Our future matters!”

Both candidates, too, turned to stories from their past to show their connection to the civil rights movement. Mr. Obama relayed a story of how his Kenyan father and his Kansan mother fell in love because of the tumult of Selma. When asked later, Mr. Obama clarified himself, saying: “I meant the whole civil rights movement.” He was born in 1961 and the confrontation at Selma took place in 1965. He also acknowledged for the first time a recent revelation by a genealogist that his mother’s ancestors in Kentucky owned slaves, something reported by the Baltimore Sun last week. “It turns out that her great-great-great-great grandfather actually owned slaves,” Mr. Obama said before another audience, over breakfast, at George C. Wallace Community College. “That’s no surprise. That’s part of our tortured, tangled history.”

Mrs. Clinton, meanwhile, recalled going with her church youth minister as a teenager in 1963 to hear Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. speak in Chicago. Yet, in her autobiography and elsewhere, Mrs. Clinton has described growing up Republican and being a “Goldwater Girl” in 1964 — in other words, a supporter of the presidential candidacy of Barry Goldwater, who opposed the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
As they re-enacted the 1965 march, making their way to the Alabama River, the Clintons were at the front of the assembly, while Mr. Obama was two people away, separated by John Lewis and Artur Davis, the Democratic congressmen. They were all linked arm-in-arm throughout as they slowly moved forward on the two-mile walk. Mr. Clinton seemed to be beaming the brightest of all. After the services, the senators were joined on the steps of the Brown Chapel by Mr. Clinton, who flew to Selma to campaign with his wife and was inducted into the National Voting Rights Hall of Fame. Indeed, the start of the re-enactment march was delayed as a crowd swarmed around Mr. Clinton, who smiled and hugged his admirers, a few of whom were even wearing Obama buttons.
yolland [at]

μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 11:46 PM   #177
Jesus Online
Angela Harlem's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 04:26 AM
Originally posted by LyricalDrug
[B As long as the Democratic candidates stay focused on criticizing Bush and not each other, things should work out fine.

Is this what parties really believe? Or worse, is it the way to really garner support? In our upcoming state elections, it is nothing but getting your mug in front of a camera and crying about what the other party is doing. I and every other person with a heartbeat and functioning eyeballs can see how the other party is fucking up. I can't say I've ever met anyone who is particularly interested in what X Party reckons Y Party us doing to fuck themselves over. I want to know what X Party wants to do which is so great. Spell it out, over and over again. Then repeat it. Then once more for prosperity.
<a href= target=_blank></a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 11:49 PM   #178
love, blood, life
indra's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 01:26 PM
Originally posted by Angela Harlem

Is this what parties really believe? Or worse, is it the way to really garner support? In our upcoming state elections, it is nothing but getting your mug in front of a camera and crying about what the other party is doing. I and every other person with a heartbeat and functioning eyeballs can see how the other party is fucking up. I can't say I've ever met anyone who is particularly interested in what X Party reckons Y Party us doing to fuck themselves over. I want to know what X Party wants to do which is so great. Spell it out, over and over again. Then repeat it. Then once more for prosperity.
Most people say they want that, but then they go and vote for the candidate who smears his/her opponent the "best." Fact is attack campaigns work and issue oriented ones don't.
indra is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 10:27 AM   #179
Blue Crack Addict
anitram's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 15,471
Local Time: 01:26 PM
Wow, McCain is tanking all over.

Giuliani is leading him 59-34 and all of Hillary, Obama and Edwards are leading him too in one-to-one matchups. Is he DOA?
anitram is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 11:15 AM   #180
Blue Crack Addict
Irvine511's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 29,448
Local Time: 01:26 PM
Originally posted by anitram
Wow, McCain is tanking all over.

Giuliani is leading him 59-34 and all of Hillary, Obama and Edwards are leading him too in one-to-one matchups. Is he DOA?

but, anitram, don't you realize that only McCain has the experience and the personal character to lead the United States to victory in Iraq?

don't you realize that the American people will soon realize that everyone is a weakling or a charlatan and that McCain's ascendency to the presidency is all but inevitable and everyone else should just give up now and spare us all from the 2008 campaign?

do you listen at all to what's posted in FYM?

Irvine511 is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright ©