Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
What else can the Senator from Illinois do for you today?
Senator Obama gave a moving speech that confronts race in America that was thoughtful, honest, and direct in a way that no other politician I can think of could. It was not the safe thing to do, but it was the right thing to do. That is why I think it will be long remembered and sets a new standard for future candidates.
For the last month I've heard a lot of calls for Obama to come clean about his ties to Rezko, to explain, reject, and denounce Rev. Wright.
Since then, Senator Obama has offered extensive interviews on his connection to Tony Rezko. His hometown papers, The Chicago Tribune, and Chicago Sun Times have declared that they are satisfied enough to give him the benefit of the doubt. Indeed, the Tribune editorial board said:
"Barack Obama now has spoken about his ties to Tony Rezko in uncommon detail. That's a standard for candor by which other presidential candidates facing serious inquiries can now be judged."
Before this, Senator Obama made his tax returns public as well as submitting all of his legislative earmark requests for public scrutiny.
Now he was directly addressed the controversy surrounding his longtime pastor Rev. Wright. I believe that these actions demonstrate a commitment to transparency as well as leadership and courage.
My question is, what else would you like the Senator to do for you other than stepping aside to wait his turn in 2016, when he is the sort of washington establishment candidate that Barack in 2008 is campaigning against?
Comments (18)
Perhaps only to pursuade enough working class voters, women, latinos, catholics and jewish voters. So that it's clear that he can really win in November. That's my only concern, nothing else.
March 18, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can Senator Clinton win the general election on the strength of those demographics alone?
March 18, 2008 4:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not about Sen. Clinton. It's about Sen. Obama. There is no reason to believe that he will win these voteres in the general election. If he couldn't take them from Clinton now, he won't take them from McCain in November.
Kerry lost working class voters to Bush 32-68%.
These voters haven't followed Obama, they are now swing voters, just like in 2004
March 18, 2008 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, it is about Senator Clinton also. If, according to you, Obama needs to prove that he can win the demographics she performs well with, shouldn't the flip side of that argument be that she needs to prove that she can win the demographics he performs well with?
March 18, 2008 9:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
If he couldn't take them from Clinton now, he won't take them from McCain in November.
That makes no sense at all. When you have two Democrats running against each other in the primaries, people will go to one side or the other. But that doesn't tell you how things will go in the general election.
Look at the polls for McCain-vs-Obama and McCain-vs-Hillary. Look at the polls that analyze this data in terms of electoral votes. You'll reach a far different conclusion.
March 18, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Promote equality to same-sex couples on a federal level, or promise to remove any and all federally given benefit to married couples.
Repeal No Child Left Behind.
Have a stronger cap-and-trade policy for manufacturing emissions, and triple his proposals for alternative energy development / production.
Give actual details to his "withdraw immediately from Iraq" position.
Stop with the anti-trade rhetoric.
March 18, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
With regard to Iraq, Sen. Obama has detailed the rate at which he would like to withdraw troops. I suspect you are alluding to comments by Sen. Obama's former foreign policy adviser that were taken out of context. No one knows what the situation in Iraq will be in January 2009. No one is even sure yet what is happening with Bush/Gates/Patreus and pauses and draw downs from the surge. To unwaveringly follow a plan that reflects the reality of Iraq as it is in March 2008 in a situation that could be completely different, for better or worse, in 2009 would not demonstrate good judgement or leadership. We already know what it's like to have a commander in chief that is stubborn and unbending with his Iraq policy. Sens. Obama and Clinton both want to bring the troops home. None of us knows exactly what they will inherit from the current administration though. On the issue of Iraq, I want the next commander in chief to be flexible and react to the Iraq of Jan 2009, not the Iraq they talked about on the campaign trail.
March 18, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lalo35,
Thank you for giving an honest reason for concern about the Obama candidacy. I remember having the same worry: assuming that proud as I'd be to vote for the Senator, I'd be voting for a campaign that couldn't win.
That's why it's been so important to me to see the surging turnout, the soaring donations, and the the thumpingly strong campaign organization.
Most important of all has been realizing that my mental map of the country way out of date. That map had the old divides from before the baby-boom, and then the baby boomers even more polarized across the same divisions. Since I first drew that map in my head, years and years have past. In every one of those years, there have been fewer white southern voters who were raised on segregation, and fewer white ethnic northern voters who grew up with out white neighbors. In every one of those years, we've added another year of post-boom, post-Voting-Rights, post-Vietnam citizens.
Sometime in February, I woke up and realized that our beautiful country actually is ready to roll. There are enough votes for victory out there, and our time is now.
March 18, 2008 4:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you have time and interest, read my post about the November elections. I explain what I mean in more detail.
March 18, 2008 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
No question about the working class voters. I've been saying it all along, although he did great with them in Wisconsin. There's something "there". But I would be far more comfortable if he had made more inroads into that base. In fact, part of today's speech was aimed at that voter, but I'm doubtful as to how much got through.
I just heard Chuck Todd on MBNBC with an interesting take: in terms of party-building, Barack has verifiable coattails for the down ticket races. And Hillary has none and in some cases, actually loses some. So would it be okay to build the Congressional majority, even if Barack loses the GE? McCain would be checked by Congress.
It's interesting. Thought I'd throw it out there.
March 18, 2008 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama is a winner now and in the GE!
Democratic voters and slightly economically challenged people, ALL people, white and black, young and old, male and female, browns and asians, people who live in large cities and samll cities, will not vote for 4 more years of Bush!!!
Maybe a small percentage are racists, but Obama is going to offset that by getting the young/new voters and a bunch of independents.
March 18, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
What will be his share of popular vote in the GE, do you think, versus McCain? 90% to 10%
March 18, 2008 7:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about a PRESS CONFERENCE without a teleprompter to read his eloquent empty rhetoric?
March 18, 2008 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gee,
You mean like the town halls he's been doing consistently for 3-4 weeks now? Just because you haven't seen them doesn't mean they didn't happen.
I remember when people were saying "he'll never do a town hall, he's not capable." Now that he's doing them, they just continue the same charges of empty rhetoric when he does happen to give a speech - in this case one that btw, he wrote himself and didn't show to his staff so the issue of whether or not he needed a script for memorization purposes could not, in my mind at least, be any more irrelevant. But then, as many others have pointed out, there's nothing he could do at this point that would convince you. This is a pointless conversation.
March 18, 2008 9:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
You mean like the town halls he's been doing consistently for 3-4 weeks now? Or the three hour sit down about Rezko he did with the tribune? Just because you haven't seen or heard about these things doesn't mean they didn't happen.
I remember when people were saying "he'll never do a town hall, he's not capable." Now that he's doing them, they just continue the same charges of empty rhetoric when he does happen to give a speech - in this case one that, btw, he wrote himself and didn't show to his staff so the issue of whether or not he needed a script for memorization purposes could not, in my mind at least, be any more irrelevant. But then, as many others have pointed out, there's nothing he could do at this point that would convince you. This is a pointless conversation.
March 18, 2008 9:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Free all sardines.
March 18, 2008 8:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
If he wants the central florida vote he can become a catholic and buggar a little boy.
March 18, 2008 9:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
"It's not about Sen. Clinton. It's about Sen. Obama. There is no reason to believe that he will win these voteres in the general election. If he couldn't take them from Clinton now, he won't take them from McCain in November."
The primary is not a good predictor of the general election:
-The number of primary voters is small
-They are mostly democrats, so would likely vote for any dem
-We have no way of knowing who the all important independents would go for
If Obama loses, I will hold my nose and vote for Hillary. Why? Because I don't want endless war in Iraq, zero health care, and a further rightwing SC. I am a typical democrat. So if Hillary lost my state, it doesn't mean she loses the general in it.
March 19, 2008 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment