You know, I find watching the likes of Matthew Weaver and JTHB project their fears and anxieties onto Obama somewhat amusing and somewhat sad. I know that trying to really deal with these very difficult, emotional issues is always going to lead to some agitation, but it's still just never pretty.

I think if you fellows really drew out the implications of what you're saying, you might actually laugh at their absurdity. What is it exactly that you think Obama would do as President that would be so bad regarding race? Do you think, perhaps, that he would start rounding up the white people and enslaving them? Would he use an executive order to mandate reparations for slavery?

With as much respect as I can muster, I'd suggest that you guys try to deal with whatever anxieties you're expressing here. I don't think they have anything to do with Obama. That's not to say that I think you should vote for him. But you're really losing the thread here.

Posted at March 18, 2008 4:05 PM in response to Hillary: I'm Glad Obama Gave That Speech

Wouldn't you need to Ctrl-C change and then Ctrl-V it? Or is just Ctrl-C'ing change the sort of empty gesture Senator Clinton's accusing Senator Obama of offering?

Posted at February 24, 2008 12:06 AM in response to You Can’t ‘Xerox’ Change

I don't have a lot to add, so I'll just say

1. As others have noted, this tone just does not make sense two days after she was so honored to be in this race with Senator Obama, and I see no way such a shift can be effective, and

2. The number of times she refers derisively or dismissively to the size and enthusiasm of Obama's crowds is starting to pile up, and I suspect that that's telling. These aren't bad things -- on the contrary, they're great. But they're for the other candidate, and they seem to make her mad, so she throws them into her list of things that are wrong with Obama.

No big insight here, I just find it an unappealing personality trait.

Posted at February 23, 2008 7:50 PM in response to Hillary: "Shame On You, Barack Obama"

Have you ever been to Waffle House? Great place.

As a jibe, though, this needs work.

Posted at February 17, 2008 10:29 PM in response to Obama Meets With John Edwards

She may yet pull out the win here in Wisconsin...but I'll never understand her not giving this contest everything she has. I know TX and OH are where she's staking her claim, but she's got a chance here, and one win, however narrow, might bring her a world of relief. I dunno.

Posted at February 17, 2008 4:51 PM in response to Obama Outspending Hillary 4-1 On Ads In Madison and Milwaukee

I'll bite.

Obama isn't terribly experienced.

Neither, by the way, were almost any of the great presidents. It's neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition either for getting elected president or for being good at the job.

So, if we could send Obama off to be govenor of Illinois for, say, four years, and then hire him as president, I'd be all for that. But that's not the way these things have ever worked.

And what would we need to do to improve Senator Clinton? I think this is as good as she gets. And man, she is not a good campaigner. I think people are still crediting her and her team with a lot of Bill's skills. They aren't there. I can't see her framing issues effectively with the nation, and that's a huge part of the job. Obama, it's clear to me, excells at it -- and it matters not a whit to me what experience taught him how.

Posted at February 13, 2008 11:31 AM in response to Obama Campaign: We're On The Verge Of Wrapping This Thing Up

I'm from Kentucky, and in the friendliest fashion possible I'd like to request that people not use "tucky" as a suffix signifying backwardness and racism. Thanks.

Posted at February 12, 2008 1:59 PM in response to Top Hillary Supporter: Some Whites In Pennsylvania "Are Not Ready" To Support Black Candidate

What MNPundit said.

At this rate they'll top $5 million pretty soon. Like tonight.

That really is pretty nuts.

Posted at February 6, 2008 8:47 PM in response to Obama Campaign Has Raised Over $4 Million -- Since Polls Closed Yesterday!

Even as an Obama supporter, I get what the people on this thread are saying.

With that said, I have a feeling that those of us who spend a lot of time online tend to overstate trends we see there. Even if, say, 30% of the regulars at TPM refused to vote for Clinton, that wouldn't necessarily indicate any significant trend in the larger electorate. Most voters would have no idea what this post was about, nor even exactly what the word "Deaniacs" refers to.

To the extent that this is a widespread phenomenon, on the other hand, I would guess that this is what charisma looks like, and if we're not too used to seeing it, you could argue that that's part of our problem. Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, Mondale, Carter: that's not a charismatic group. Bill Clinton in 1992 was the exception, and while I'm not prepared to offer proof, I suspect that he generated excitement more from his tone and style than from his specific policy prescriptions.

Posted at February 6, 2008 7:13 PM in response to Barack Obama Is Not Jesus