Obviously, you have not paid attention to the Primaries. The states where Hillary got more of the "blue-collar white working voters" were in states, and rural areas that Democrats just started to put in play thanks in large part to Howard Dean and the 50 state strategy. Anywhere where Hillary won a primary it was mainly because she had the Democratic Establishment Behind her. Ex: PA, OH, NJ, CA. Doe you not think that Ed Rendell, Bob Casey, Barack Obama unbelievable grassroots structure, the Democratic Party, liberal & progressive activists are not going to crush McCain in the General!?--then you do not understand history, voting patterns, and the wobbly infrastructure the GOP the is in. (Not to add, their out of touch platform.) Ohio, do you think that Governor Strickland, Sherod Brown, the Democratic Party, liberal & progressive activists are not going to beat John McCain?! Michigan, the same! FL will be the only problem, because its voting system is still the most fraudulent and there is a Republican, and yes a large segment that are racial, vote against their interest. West Virginia, Kentucky are not states that are bastions of liberal--albeit Senator Byrd different incarnations--or progressive thinking folks. Though, we are making progress there too.
States with majority of white voters that Barack Obama won handily: Iowa, almost New Hampshire, Colorado, Washington, Virginia, Kansas, Wyoming, North Carolina(though the Black was big), the Dakotas, Oregon, Missouri (which he will in the General by more than 4 pts.), Illinois, Indiana was push--with only 7% black voters.
Should I go on?

Posted at May 20, 2008 4:25 PM in response to Where Does American Liberalism Stand Today?

You are obviously are either very ignorant or did not read the book; let me guess the latter.

Posted at May 20, 2008 3:56 PM in response to Where Does American Liberalism Stand Today?

1. Obama
2. No
3. Obama
4. Obama

Posted at April 15, 2008 9:53 PM in response to TPM Readership Poll

The problem is very obvious: The Democratic Party did not build a public relations and media campaign (like they did w/ Social Security) to show what this Act has in store for Special Interests. Again, with the patriotic fervor that the GOP uses in such disgraceful propaganda, the masses going along uneducated about the Act, we need a grass-roots and a Party to Educate the people.
I am ashamed of the Democratic Party; still, I think the progressive movement is to blame, too.

Posted at March 3, 2008 10:59 AM in response to Today's Must Read

That CNN piece was such an "unfair and balanced" reports of the facts. "Washington is town made of lobbyists. . .you cannot get around it. . . blah-blah." Where were the facts pertaining to have much money was given to each campaign by the lobbyists!? Where were the facts pertaining to McCain's lies that Michael Isikoff unearthed from Mr. Straight Talk's own Deposition!? Wolf Blizter deports himself as a priest--ironically, without the balls to take any confessions!!! "Sorry, I know that McCain has violated FEC regulations, but this is too big a sin for me to hear. I will turn this over to Olberman, and definitely let Jack weigh in on when he's back in The Silly Situation Room. Ok?
I must go!"

Posted at February 23, 2008 5:41 AM in response to Lobbyist or Consultant?

The legions of public figures of past and new that support Obama must be of some evidence as to his ability to be the best Democratic nominee.
I agree w/ Krugman on so many issues; this one, he is off. After Obama gets the nomination, the Clintons and the Democratic will unite. The only people I see not voting for Hillary would be the youth; though, I think Obama will do everything in his power to speak to his supporters. Then, they will realize that having a Republican will be a death sentence. So, don't worry.
I think Krugman's response comes from the vitriol that The Republican Noise Machine has demonstrated over the last 30 years, and their success @ using such base propaganda and cynical tactics that Paul is worried that Obama can't handle it. (Truthfully, I understand from Paul's writing that race has been there number tactic, so I see where his anxiety stems most.) That said, Obama and the Democratic Party and it surrogates are ready and will fight this one to the death.

Posted at February 23, 2008 5:27 AM in response to Paul Krugman's Cheap Shot

Excellent point. I was thinking in a similar vein.

Posted at February 21, 2008 8:45 PM in response to Report: Liberal Bloggers Mostly Skeptical Of Times Story About McCain

If the turnout for Obama continues; if he is elected President, I think that true citizen participation will be vindicated. That said, I don't think it stops there. With so many organizations to check the The Republican Noise Machine, I think that no civic duty will be more important than pushing back against there most egregious pronouncements.
Letter writing, marches, and how we can stop supporting some of their advertisers will be very helpful. Still, we need an alternative to Fox--where are you Al Gore? Someone need to start a Cable Television Station that is Progressive.

Posted at February 21, 2008 7:29 PM in response to Holy... Bill O'Reilly Talks About Setting up a Lynching Party

Truth: I think the Times has much more legs to this story that we will see as the days, weeks go on. Actually, as Paul states there are a lot of contradictions pertaining to McCain's press release.
Also, I think the Times has burned itself before, and knows better than to leave such a "thin story" out there without more coming.
Every news organization worth its salt is going to investigate Mr. Clean w/ a fine tooth-brush.
Sure, the Times could have waited a day or two, maybe a week. We won't win the South anyway. lol
Get the ball rolling. . . .

Posted at February 21, 2008 7:17 PM in response to What Did McCain Actually Do for Iseman's Clients?

I definitely think that the New York Times has more pieces that will make this puzzle evident: Mr. Straight Talk Express has been in bed(figuratively, I hope--he's her grandfather)w/powerful interests groups/lobbyists that he purportedly scorns.
In 2004, one of his chief advisers left McCain to support Kerry for President. I cannot think of his name. . .someone help. But, he wrote a searing indictment about how "pork baller spending" was in fact an Issue that John McCain did not tackle. He was missing in action, though he had a web-site purporting to curb pork, while giving away--w/ his votes--to the Military-Industrial Complex w/out deference.
So, one thing is certain that the Image by the MSM of a 'maverick', a 'reformist' is so hypocritical.
Now, we have a silly right-wing up in arms. Why? Because, their next Presidential hopeful was thought to be a Reformer. lol

Posted at February 21, 2008 6:46 PM in response to What Did McCain Actually Do for Iseman's Clients?